Democratic politics meets Iraq debate (Hold yer nose alert!)

Democratic politics meets Iraq debate
By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer
Sat Jun 24, 10:43 PM ET

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., meets with reporters after addressing the New Democratic Network (NDN) during their two-day annual meeting focusing on the theme, 'What Comes Next A New Politics for America', Friday, June 23, 2006 in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

WASHINGTON - When two Democrats looking toward 2008 pushed hard for a firm date on withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, they crashed headlong into Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid's effort to retake the Senate this year.

Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin want to pull out all combat forces over the next year, a proposal that delights the left wing of the Democratic Party but that failed overwhelmingly in the Senate on Thursday.

That 86-13 vote forced Democrats in difficult midterm election campaigns, such as Sens. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Maria Cantwell of Washington, to go on record on the question of ending the military mission in Iraq — and risk the wrath of liberals in their states.

Bucking pleas from party leaders, Kerry and Feingold insisted that the Senate vote on their proposal. That created a political headache for Reid, who had been trying to rally Democrats around a more moderate Iraq resolution — one that called for troop withdrawals but didn't include an end date — in hopes of uniting the party and maximizing its chances of retaking the Senate in November. The Democrats need six seats for the majority.

In the end, the GOP-led Senate defeated the two Democratic plans for pulling out U.S. forces — but only after two weeks of haggling that left the party fractured on Iraq and even caused divisions in the leadership ranks, pitting Reid against his top lieutenant, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois.

"It is, I think, a tribute to the Democratic Party at this moment in time that we are honestly and openly struggling with a lot of the difficult issues facing our country," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, another potential Democratic presidential nominee, said Friday.

Lieberman, a proponent of the war and backer of President Bush's national security policies, faces a primary challenge from businessman Ned Lamont. Since announcing his candidacy, Lamont has gained in the polls, largely on his criticism of Lieberman and the war. Lieberman voted against both Democratic proposals. The primary is Aug. 8.

Cantwell, who supported the war but has criticized Bush's handling of it, has drawn several challengers from the left, including a candidate backed by peace activist Cindy Sheehan. She voted against the deadline for combat troops to be out, but in favor of the more moderate resolution for forces to start withdrawing. Her primary is Sept. 19.

Democratic officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to freely discuss the turn of events, said Reid's effort to get his rank-and-file in sync on Iraq began weeks ago with Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, as they worked on an Iraq resolution that a Democratic majority could support.

In the meantime, Kerry and Feingold proposed to withdraw combat forces by the end of 2006. They eventually offered a plan with a deadline of July 2007.

"I'm doing the right thing for the policy in the region. I will never make a decision about national security based on politics," Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, said in a recent interview. Feingold, for his part, characterized the proposal as "a reasonable plan to finish the Iraq mission."

With two proposals fueling criticism of a divided party in an election year, Democratic leaders pulled both sides together in a series of meetings to try come up with one position that satisfied all senators.

But officials said it quickly became clear that Kerry and Feingold were adamant that any proposal include a deadline, a deal-breaker for Levin and other senators focused on 2006.

Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who's in charge of the Senate Democrats' campaign efforts, told Democrats that he did not want Kerry's proposal to come up for a vote because it would put moderates running this year in a tough spot. The fate of candidates like Lieberman and Cantwell is never far from Schumer's mind, and he only wanted a vote on Levin's resolution.

Over the course of two weeks, officials said, senators repeatedly asked Kerry not to push for a vote. Under pressure, he wavered at one point but ultimately decided to follow through.

Reid, for his part, held his regular meeting last week with his rank-and-file up for re-election this year, and Democratic officials said he pitched them Levin's resolution.

At one point, Republican officials said Reid told them he was trying to discourage Kerry from pushing for a vote on his proposal. After they heard this, Republicans brought up Kerry's proposal and quickly dispatched it in what Democrats criticized as political gamesmanship.

"It's no secret we would have preferred a single Democratic amendment," said Jim Manley, Reid's spokesman. "At the end of the day, Democrats accomplished what we set out to do — we gave every Democrat a positive framework for how to carry out the transition in Iraq and begin the redeployment of U.S. forces."

Indeed, 37 Democrats voted for Levin's resolution. Yet, 12 — including Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat — broke ranks with Reid to also vote in favor of a deadline.

Reid, officials said, was infuriated by Durbin's defection as well as a presentation the Illinois senator made to the caucus Tuesday during Democrats' weekly policy lunch.

The wide-ranging presentation on various issues included a poll that showed the American public leaning toward candidates who favor pulling out of Iraq in the next year — exactly the position of Kerry and Feingold.

"I'm doing the right thing for the policy in the region. I will never make a decision about national security based on politics," Kerry said...

Those silly Democratics. Other than MAYBE voting to go into Iraq, is there one thing RATS have proposed that would kill a single terrorist?

Yeah. What the Republicans need to do is feature in their ads Congressman Murtha's assertion that the United States is the chief threat to peace in the world - more than N. Korea and Iran. Then follow that up with his suggestion to move the troops to Okinawa.

is there one thing RATS have proposed that would kill a single terrorist?

Well, what they have proposed WILL keep them out of power. They seem to have redeployed their chances in November.

Openly struggling??? Six years of undermining this country and the coalition and aiding the enemy without shame. Now they think they are struggling - what has happened is the realization this nation wants to WIN this war. They've given it their all with traitorous statements and now find themselves in the proverbial quagmire - it would have been a good thing for Pelosi, Reid, Clinton, Kerry, Durbin, Feingold et al, to have given their patriotic support to the WOT; to have put their petty Bush Bashing behind them and supported this country. As it is I wouldn’t trust a single one of them to EVER protect America – their decision to aid the enemy will haunt them for years to come.

I will never make a decision about national security based on politics," Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, said in a recent interview.

Was that before or after he was for it or against it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.