War on Terror

Political wind, Support our troops, War on Terror

Carl Levin: If Bush surrenders, Dems will “support the troops”

by  • 

In an editorial this morning, by the Washington Times:

If Congress fails to pass a supplemental appropriations bill funding the war in the next 20 days, it would appear to be legally impossible to continue military operations in Iraq for any extended amount of time — including the successful troop surge. Similarly, it would jeopardize continued funding for production of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, [emphasis added mine] which is an integral part of the military’s efforts to protect American and coalition troops from roadside bombs.

But just when it seemed like Democrats were willing to see American fighting men and women killed and maimed in order to prove their political bona fides to George Soros and the Daily Kos, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin let the cat out of the bag: The Democrats don’t really want to pick this fight, at least not until next year. Mr. Levin said Wednesday that Democrats would be willing to approve funding sufficient to continue the war until June, setting the stage for a political battle next spring. But they will only agree to do this if Mr. Bush announces a date for withdrawing the troops from Iraq — and that sounds like the senator wants the president to announce a surrender date. This is what Democrats mean when they say they “support the troops.”

Political wind, Terrorist Surveillance Program, War on Terror

House GOP halts wiretapping bill

by  • 

In the Washington Times this morning:

House Democrats, confounded by a Republican procedural maneuver that would force an embarrassing vote on terrorism, yesterday called off a vote on an electronic-surveillance bill that the White House opposes.

Republicans would have forced Democrats either to vote to effectively kill the bill that restricts federal wiretap power or to vote against authorizing the government to spy on Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and other foreign terrorist groups.
…
Mr. Boehner said the Democrats faced “a very simple choice.” “They can allow our intelligence officials to conduct surveillance on the likes of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda or prohibit them from doing so and jeopardize our national security,” he said. “Every member of the majority will now have the opportunity to go on record.”

House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer said it was not a setback for the bill, which the White House warns would open intelligence gaps the Democrat-led Congress voted to close just two months ago when updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). “We are going to finish it next week,” said Mr. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat, adding that the procedural move had only slowed action.
…
Republicans stopped the legislation, which was expected to pass easily in a vote scheduled for early yesterday afternoon, by announcing plans to submit a motion to recommit. The move, rarely used before this session, lets the minority party try to change bills as they approach final passage. If it passes, the bill is sent back to its originating committee with instructions. Being sent back effectively kills the proposal.

The instructions are what made this motion so potent. It would have ordered the bill amended to prohibit the law from interfering with “surveillance needed to prevent Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, or any other foreign terrorist organization” from attacking the U.S.