Hewitt Blog

The House will vote on Congressman Murtha's proposal to withdraw from Iraq later today.

That will be one of the more significant votes of the war. I wish the Senate could find a way to take up a similar proposal. From a second report on the looming vote:

By forcing the issue to a vote, Republicans placed many Democrats in a politically unappealing position — whether to side with Murtha and expose themselves to attacks from the White House and congressional Republicans, or whether to oppose him and risk angering the voters that polls show want an end to the conflict.

A good test of those polls, and also of D.C.'s blowhard quotient. Not surprisingly, John Kerry found a way to remind people that it was all about John Kerry:

"I won't stand for the swift-boating of Jack Murtha," Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, responded Friday. Also a Vietnam veteran, Kerry was dogged during the campaign by a group called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that challenged his war record.

What ought Congressional Republicans to be fighting for and rallying around? It isn't complicated:

Win the war.
Confirm the judges.
Cut the taxes.
Control the spending.

Twelve words. Not difficult to express, but apparently beyond the ability of the Congressional majorities to articulate and defend. As the worst week for the Congressional Republicans since their rise to power in November 1994 comes to a close (Jumping Jim Jeffords' big bounce is a distant second as that was an individual betrayal, not a collective failure of political will), the electeds are about to scatter without so much as one hour of serious floor debate about the hard left turn taken by the Democrats, or even the latest front page leak of a national security secret.

You cannot win arguments that you don't make, and you can't maintain majorities when those majorities make little difference in the life of the country.

The only thing for the center-right committed to the twelve words to do is keep up the pressure via direct communication with Senate and House GOP leadership and with endangered GOP "moderates" who need to hear that their bigest problem getting re-elected will be the open and sustained opposition of GOP regulars. All the key contact info is toward the bottom of this post.

"This will be remembered as the week that President Bush lost control over the Iraq War debate," writes E. J. Dionne in his column today. The biggest problem, he notes, isn't with the Democrats:

Even more alarming for Bush is the fact that Senate Republican leaders felt obligated to introduce and pass their own resolution declaring 2006 ``a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty.'' The resolution called, without specific timetables, for ``creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq.''

Sen. Richard Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, noted that the Republican resolution drew heavily on the language of the Democrats' proposal. Durbin praised Sen. John Warner, the Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee, for a speech this week arguing that the next 60 to 180 days -- notice Warner's time line -- were critical to the future of Iraq and that the Iraqi government needed to come to grips with its ``internal problems.''

``Warner's speech,'' Durbin said in an interview, ``was as clear a signal as this White House will ever get that its loyalists in the Republican Party have lost faith in its strategy.''

It isn't just liberal columnists who are judging the Senate GOP's collapse accurately. This is from today's Wall Street Journal lead editorial:

It's been a bad week for the American war effort, not in Iraq or anywhere else in the field but in Washington, D.C. The American Congress is sending increasingly loud signals of irresolution in Iraq, including panicky calls for withdrawal....

There's little comfort in the fact that Senate Republicans stood up Monday to Democratic demands for a specific troop-withdrawal timetable. The GOP Senate leadership still put itself on record that it believes time is running short. No wonder Minority Leader Harry Reid is bragging of having "change[d] the policy of the United States with regard to Iraq."

The incredibly shrinking Congressional GOP has lost its footing and even its ability to respond to outrageous posturing like Congressman Murtha's. (Mudville Gazette manages to help set some of the record straight on the casualties from the GWOT.)

This is all subject to a rapid turn-around, but the thing about a breach in a previously solid dam is that the fissure can widen quickly if it isn't repaired quickly. Pretending it hasn't happened or downplaying its significance seem exactly the strategies to take a week of defeats and turn it into a month of setbacks until that month becomes three and Judge Alito is tossed overboard.

What is most necessary now is clarity about both the defeats and about the need for urgent action behind a unified political front.

Given that priority, Senator Frist's statment yesterday about Monday's debacle is very alarming:

"The Republicans in this body are 100% behind the President as Commander in Chief. We will not cut and run. The [Monday]amendments were crafted as a cut and run, and it sends the wrong signal to our troops, to Al Qaeda. The letter we crafted was intended to address the cut and run approach generated by Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI). The Administration reports to us on a regular basis about the progress of the war and their plans. Our amendment was crafted to thwart the cut and run strategy of the Democrats."

The Majority Leader's denial of the reality of Monday's collapse mirrors the House leadership's studied indifference to the deletion of ANWR exploration from the budget bill, and both Houses cannot expect the refrain of "it will get fixed in conference" to obscure the disarray. The party activists know what it takes to win elections and especially center-right voters. It takes leadership, not dithering and deal-cutting.

The House GOP notched a small victory last night, but it is so modest as to be embarassing, and of course ANWR exploration is missing.

But it is a start. Now if both Houses were to take up Congressman Murtha's resolution and debate it through the weekend along with the Patriot Act, the repair work would be well under way, and the post-Thanksgiving session an opportunity to remind the American public that there is a huge difference between the two parties, a difference that can be explained in twelve words.

Mark Steyn and James Lileks, columnists to the world, were my guests today, and both are full of fire --directed primarily at Republicans in Congress but also at the Democrat cut-and-run caucus. Radioblogger has the transcripts.

And Instapundit discovers that Congressmna Murtha has been down this road before. In May of 2004, to be exact. When Congrewssman Murtha calls for immediate withdrawalof all American troops wherever they are in March of 2007, will it be headline news again?

When pressed by General Hallek for his plans, general Grant responded:

"I intend to cross the Rappahanock River with the Army of Potomac and engage the Army of Northern Virginia and keep them continuously engaged until they are destroyed or surrendered."

Somebody send this to Congressman Murtha. And Senate Republicans.

The Senate GOP's collapse on Monday and Congressman Murtha's call today for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq set the stage for a crucial and absolutely necessary debate in both Houses of Congress. Speaker Hastert and Majority Leader Frist should clear the calenders and schedule a debate on the Murtha Resolution asap, and spend hours in open session asking what Congressman Murtha's proposal would mean for Iraq, the region, the wider war on terror and American safety.

The Senate GOP should be particularly grateful to the Pennsylvania Democrat for giving them an opportunity to purge their pratfall from Monday from the record.

Unfortunately, I am betting that too many Members have Thanksgiing plans, plans which it would be inconvenient to disturb.

Congressman Murtha is entitled to any opinion he wants to hold, including bone-headed ones about immediate withdrawal from Iraq.

But the Congressman allowed his zeal for retreat to get the better of his common sense when, inresponse to a reporter's question on the president's and the vice president's speeches about the crazy charges being hurled by rewrite specialists, Murtha said:

"I like guys who have never been there to criticize us who have been there. I like that. I like guys that have got five deferments and never been there ands end people to war and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done."

That's fever swamp stuff, the old "chickenhawk" charge that would be equally applicable to hundreds of Democrats in Congress as well as great war time leaders like FDR. It discredits the Congressman, not his targets.

Murtha's 30+ years in the Marines make him a great American. But he's a lousy Congressman today and a cheap shot artist to boot.

UPDATE:

From an "active duty officer with significant combat experience":

As to the Congressman's remarks regarding our Vice President, that is a direct assault on the Constitution of the US which clearly gives the civilians control over the military. You will not meet ONE officer in our Armed Forces who does not believe in this as an article of faith. We have sworn our very lives to its protection. I find it interesting that Cong. Murtha would attack that precept of our governing document. One caller mentioned FDR. What about President Clinton? Was he unqualified to conduct the war in Bosnia due to his contempt for our Armed Forces? NO. He was the president and that makes him the commander in chief, PERIOD. Murtha should be pilloried relentlessly for his seditious remarks and he should never be taken seriously again.

And this:

Congressman Murtha,

PO Box 780
Johnstown, PA 15907-0780

As a U.S. Army veteran of the Vietnam Era and the father of two sons, one a 6 year Army Veteran and the other a 13 year active duty soldier preparing for his 3rd tour in Iraq, I want you to know that I, and they, feel you have abandoned them today. We have great respect for your honorable service but your past service makes it even worse a betrayal of those who fight today!

My oldest son said it best after 9/11 when I told him “well the American people are behind you now”. His response was “yeah Dad….for how long” it didn’t take the Democratic Party very long to abandon them. It took you a little longer but the betrayal is complete. We are winning this war everywhere except at home. You have forgotten what it felt like to be a soldier spit on by your fellow citizens. You join the ranks of those who want to drive military recruiters out of the schools. You sir, should be ashamed.

BY MARY KATHARINE HAM

Please excuse the little formatting problem above. This really is MKH posting; we'll get that worked out ASAP.

I just got back from the first-ever Senate Blogorama at the Capitol. Justin at Right Side Redux has video and the names of all the participants.

I'll cover the highlights/lowlights for you on the Iraq amendment. I noticed that the only Senators who admitted their phones were ringing off the hook about it were the ones who voted against both amendments, like Saxby Chambliss:

"I voted against both of them...I thought the second amendment was a little less mischievous, but it still sent a bad message."

"I will say that my phones have been kind of ringing off the wall on that issue. That's what people have been calling about."

I asked him about his views on a do-over, New-Coke amendment, as Hugh has suggested. He said he didn't think that would happen. Instead, he said, the right response is for Republicans to continue the push-back on the "Bush lied" lie. Unfortunately for all of us, that push-back would be a whole lot more effective if it came from a bunch of guys who hadn't just passed this amendment.

From Sen. Brownback:

"I worried about that vote because I didn't want to send that signal... We did not capitulate to the Democrat position."

He went on to say that our enemies in Iraq and in the War on Terror in general understand that the place to attack an American war effort is at the point of public opinion. So, he understands the power of the bad message. Why vote for it again?

Sen. Frist's answer to the same question:

"Republicans in this body are 100% behind the President as Commander in Chief... We are committed not to have a cut-and-run approach, no matter what the polls say."

He then spoke about how bad the Democrat amendment was-- that it was "crafted as a cut-and-run approach," and that it was "absolutely wrong, sends the wrong message to Al Qaeda."

If I understood him correctly, he said the Republican amendment was crafted as a contrast to the Democrats' amendment. When they were "side-by-side," he said, one was clearly a cut-and-run amendment and the other was not. As a result of the Republican amendment, "actual reporting," on the war in Iraq, "will be no different."

I asked, since it made no changes in current policy and reporting, why even have an amendment? Regular Americans can't be blamed for thinking this represents some sort of change in policy. Was it legislative necessity?

"It's sense of the Senate; it really has no legislative import."

All right, if you have to explain why the Republican amendment is good by using a phrase most people would have to look up in the C-SPAN Congressional Glossary, then I'd say you've already lost the message battle.

The bottom line on the Iraq amendment is that, subtle differences and the "sense of the Senate" notwithstanding, every Dem in the Senate is now saying "timetable for Iraq" in every soundbite, and Senate Republicans have given that phrase much more weight than it had before.

I'll get to more pleasant subjects in other posts, but the whole event was very nice. There was WiFi, the set-up was fairly informal and intimate, the Senators answered quite a few questions, and we got to blog under chandeliers, which makes me feel like a very posh blogger, indeed. I also got to meet some of my long-time reads-- Orin Kerr and Ed Driscoll. Cool.

Senate Republicans are holding a blogger row day, and an excellent running summary is available at the blog of the National Manufacturers Association.

None of the GOP senators who have spoken seem willing to bring up the Monday fiasco, despite the fact that their phone lines are melting and will continue to do so.

From the Boston Globe this morning,a brief paragrapgh that hints at a much, much bigger story:

Legislators reverse themselves on raise
November 17, 2005

HARRISBURG -- After bringing four months of abuse down on their heads, Pennsylvania lawmakers yesterday repealed a pay raise they gave themselves last July. Governor Ed Rendell signed the repeal legislation less than three hours after the state Senate approved it, 50 to 0. It passed the House, 197 to 1, on Monday. (AP)

Dash over to Philly's Inquirer for the details:

HARRISBURG - The legislative pay raise that bludgeoned approval ratings, gave birth to a populist revolt, and knocked a state Supreme Court justice off the bench died yesterday, succumbing to a severe case of political expediency.

It was four months and nine days old.

"Twelve million citizens buried this legislative outrage," said Gene Stilp, a Harrisburg activist and a leading opponent of the pay raise. "Time will tell what legislators they bury in the primary."

Gov. Rendell signed the legislation yesterday terminating the double-digit legislative raises, and in so doing penned its epitaph. "I urge the legislature to return to the people's business and hope that by signing this bill, we can channel the great interest and energy that was focused on this issue for the good of the citizens we serve," he said.

The bill became law a mere two hours after the Senate gave final approval to it and sent it to the governor.

"We are here to correct a mistake," said Sen. Majority Leader David J. Brightbill (R., Lebanon) from the Senate floor. "As one of the people who exercised poor judgment, I would like to apologize."

Genuine anger among Pennsylvania voters forced Ed Rendell and his allies in the state legislature to repeal their sneak-attack pay raise, and to apologize. The political class had hoped that the anger would pass by, but it only grew in intensity, and the electeds could see the seeds of a political disaster a year off, so they moved.

The web-talk radio synergy has empowered citizen activists in ways never imagined, but primarily in the ability to locate and communicate with each other. Paybacks are now not only possible, they are relatively easy to organize. Cross a wire, and the voters will not only know about it, they will be reminded of the failure again and again, and mobilized in advance of a crucial election.

Which is the very sobering message that Senate and House Republicans need to hear --today.

In three separate instances over the past ten days, the GOP elite has either broken with the party's base or been unable to produce the result that the base believes ought to be immediately forthcoming.

In order of importance:

Most of the Senate GOP's voted Monday to undercut the war effort and to send a message of weakness to our allies and enemies alike with John Warner's amendment demanding that 2006 be a "year of transition" in Iraq and requesting even more reports from the Adminsitration on the conduct of the war.

Last week the House leadership failed to rally enough votes to include exploration in ANWR in the deficit reduction bill and then failed to produce a bill period.

These "results" need to change. Immediately.

From my conversation with South Dakota's John Thune yesterday:

HH: It seems very clear to me that the reaction has been overwhelmingly, even brutally negative on your colleagues who voted, in effect, to undercut the war effort. Have they been hearing from people today?

JT: They have, and I've got to tell you, I've talked to a number of Senators today, Hugh, who were on the other side of that vote yesterday, who if they had a do-over, would have changed. I mean, I don't think anybody anticipated the blowback that they would get...

HH: Senator Thune, just a suggestion. Why is it impossible to go to the floor with a resolution that says we know what we did, and we made a mistake, and we wish to correct it on behalf of the men and women in the American military, our Iraqi allies, in order not to send the wrong message. Why not own the mistake like New Coke, and just get it out of the record?

JT: That's...there's been some discussion about that, frankly, Hugh, and I've been...and even suggested that that might be something we should do, just to get people on the record.

A record-correcting Senate resolution giving guidance to the Conference is exactly what needs to happen, preferably today or tomorrow. Certainly if you are a senior advisor to Bill Frist's presidential campaign team you know this, or to George Allen's. The damage done by this collapse isn't going to go away. It is going to metastasize unless it is repudiated.

See the statement by the Pennsylvania Senate Majority Leader above.

It is stunning to see Majority Leader Frist this morning describing asbestos legislation as the Senate's "first priority" in 2006.

Asbestos? First priority? There's a war going on and a SCOTUS nominee hung out to dry and avian flu warnings piling up. What could the Majority Leader be thinking, except a bald effort to change the subject from the rising discontent on the center-right over Monday's vote and the accompanying feeling that the country doesn't have the Congressional leadership it deserves.

Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania. Majority Leader Frist is retiring, but do Rick Santorum, Jim Talent, and Conrad Burns want to fight '06 on these grounds? Are contenders for open or weak Democratic senate seats standing by and saying nothing as the GOP Senate marches over the cliff?

Go back to the floor and undo the damage of Monday. Then schedule a debate on the economy and the need for tax cuts to keep it moving. Start defending Alito, confirming lower court nominees, and praise the Vice President's speech last night. The lassitude and indifference to the pasting the Adminsitration has been taking is simply amazing.

Get a spine.

The same goes for the House leadership. It is better to lose the budget deficit bill than lose ANWR. You can't make changes in public opinion by hiding the debate, and the "moderates" who prefer to cripple the search for crucial oil reserves because they are afraid of environmentalist voters who won't support them anyway need to be debated and voted down. Here's a graph from last Wednesday's Washington Post from a House GOP opponent of ANWR drilling:

"Hope springs eternal that we can pull the rabbit out of the hat," said Science Committee Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.), a vocal critic of drilling in the Arctic reserve. "I really do think moderates are coming into their own. We're flexing our muscles collectively."

So Boehlert is going to lead the effort to anger the GOP base which ignores the national security issues and endangers the majority and the leadership is going to leave him in charge of a committee because he's a gerrymandered time-server?

Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania.

I didn't believe until recently that 1994 in reverse could rise up in 2006. The GOP has decisive advantages in money, the seats that are being contested, and of course the base is deeply supportive of the president and the war.

But the Congressional Republicans first two advantages can be negated by being seen to abandon the the third, and that's what's been underway for the last two months in D.C., first with Miers rebellion, and now in the House and the Senate. The D.C. elites --including the professional class that stays year-in and year-out-- aren't getting it, as the surprise among GOP senators at the deep anger over Monday's vote demonstrates.

There is time to reverse this trend and figure out that the number one priority in November, December, January and every month until victory is achieved is the war, and the number two priority is the courts. (Where, by the way, is the Judiciary Committee hearing on Brett Kavanaugh for the D.C. Circuit?) Yes spending restraint matters as does economic growth via continued low taxes, but asbestos isn't on the list of key issues outside of the Beltway.

But time is short, and the Congress can't wave goodbye and jet off to their holidays leaving this mess to fester.

Help wake up the Congress.

First, demand a vote to get a sense of the senate that Monday's vote was a New Coke moment, and they are sorry. Yep, sorry. Threw a spoke. Took the apple. Fell flat and fast on their faces:

Senate Majority Leader Frist, (202) 224-3344, e-mail

Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, (202) 224-2541, e-mail

Armed Services Chairman John Warner, (202) 224-2023, e-mail

You can also use the Congressional switchboard to contact any other Senate office: 202-225-3121.

Then let four Congressmen who are very vulnerable in 2006 --anti-ANWR Republicans all-- know that you will work to see that they won't be returning to the body if ANWR exploration isn't sent to the president:

Dave Reichert of Washington State, 202-225-7761, e-mail

Jim Gerlach of Pennsylvania, 202-225-4315, e-mail

Christopher Shays of Connecticut, 202-225-5541, e-mail

Roger Simmons of Connecticut, 202-225-2076, e-mail

The example from Pennsylvania ought to be front and center in D.C. today and for the rest of the year. The blowback at the GOP is building --on the right. The Senate and House leadership has to know what is coming their way from the Michael Moore-Nancy Pelosi-Cindy Sheehan-Harry Reid left. That can be defeated and in fact decisively so, but not unless they give their own supporters omething worth fighting for.

And it isn't defeatism in Iraq and asbestos legislation.

First Rather, now Woodward: Guilty of the very sort of cover-ups for which they pursued Nixon relentlessly.

How long until Woodward declares "Your assistant managing editor is not a crook?"