Iraq Resolutions

Those of us who are passionately opposed to the continuation of the Iraq war have mixed feelings about the upcoming debate over the Iraq war resolution in the Senate. Yes, it's good to oppose escalation of the troops, but a non-binding resolution containing watered down language which will certainly be ignored by the White House anyway, hardly seems worth the time. Still, one could argue that something is better than nothing, so when Sen. John Warner, R- Virginia, joined with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to announce his opposition to Bush's plan to escalate the war, that seemed to be a positive sign.

But now comes the news that all 49 Republican Senators are prepared to filibuster next week if the Democrats don't agree to debate additional resolutions introduced on the war. Yes, all those "principled" Republicans - Snowe, Hagel ("go sell shoes"), even John Warner, who is prepared to vote against cloture even if it delays a vote on his own resolution.

Our Texas senators are split, taking different tactics in this debate. Sen. Cornyn, as we know, is an unapologetic supporter of Bush's war. Cornyn explains why he thinks blocking a vote on the resolution is a good thing.

Cornyn said the Biden resolution and another resolution prepared by Sen. John Warner, R-Va., also opposing the troop buildup, “are fraught with meaning, and the meaning is all bad.”

There, that was illuminating, wasn't it? But Cornyn wants debate on his own resolution, one that supports the buildup.

Republicans including John McCain of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas have drafted alternative resolutions supporting the president's plan. McConnell didn't say which Republican alternatives should be considered.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, on the other hand, wants to appear moderate while doing nothing to alienate any of the powers that be. Here is her position before the elections last year on whether she regretted her vote to authorize the Iraq war:

The list of those who say they would vote differently is a bipartisan group whose ranks include former and current Republican Senators Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois, Bob Smith of New Hampshire, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas.

Here are her comments from last month regarding the nonbinding resolution opposing troop escalation.

Some Republicans worried that it would undermine Bush's diplomatic efforts on Iraq. "The worst thing we can do as a Congress is to undercut the president internationally," Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Republican, said Wednesday on CNN television.

Sometimes it's hard to decide which stance on the war is more contemptible - Cornyn's pigheaded support for the administration's ruinous policies, or Hutchison's "We can have our cake and eat it, too" political posturing.

Meanwhile, the latest NIE (National Intelligence Report) casts serious doubt on our ability to stabilize Iraq.

In the bleakest terms yet, a new U.S. government intelligence assessment warned Friday that Iraq's sectarian violence is now self-sustaining and that the country's forces will be "hard pressed" to assume responsibility for security before mid-2008, despite accelerated U.S. training.

And yet in the midst of this chaos, Bush is asking for another $245 billion for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which would bring the totals to a staggering three-quarters of a trillion dollars. But the President also promised us a balanced budget in five years, so something's gotta give.

"Controlling spending also requires us to address the unsustainable growth of entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid," Bush said. "Spending for these programs is growing faster than inflation, faster than our economy, and faster than our ability to pay for it."

Funny, the same logic doesn't seem to apply when he's asking for a 10.5 percent increase for the Pentagon budget.