Playing Politics, Liberals Get Handed Setback

It always fascinates me the way these Post reporters define words in their editorials/news articles. As was pointed out last night on "Special Report with Brit Hume," the debate is what has been occurring for the past week, this vote was an attempt to end debate.

GOP Stalls Debate On Troop Increase
Democrats Fall Short On War Resolution

By Jonathan Weisman and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, February 6, 2007; Page A01

A long-awaited Senate showdown on the war in Iraq was shut down before it even started yesterday, when nearly all Republicans voted to stop the Senate from considering a resolution opposing President Bush's plan to send 21,500 additional combat troops into battle.

A day of posturing, finger-pointing and backroom wrangling came to nothing when Democratic and Republican leaders could not reach agreement on which nonbinding resolutions would be debated and allowed to come to a vote. The Senate's 49 to 47 vote last night to proceed to debate on Bush's new war policy fell 11 votes short of the 60 needed to break the logjam. Just two Republicans, Norm Coleman (Minn.) and Susan Collins (Maine), voted with the Democrats to proceed with the debate. Both are considered among the most vulnerable senators standing for reelection in 2008.

Republicans insisted that the impasse will soon be broken. But the leaders of the two parties appeared to be far from a compromise last night, and the White House has worked hard to block action on a resolution disapproving of the president's decision to boost troop levels.

"What you just saw was Republicans giving the president the green light to escalate in Iraq," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said after the vote. Reid contended that Republicans "are trying to avoid a debate on this matter."

You may have noticed that the presses definition of "debate" is exactly the same as that of Senator "Land Shark" Reid. Now why do you suppose that is? Particularly when that definition is precisely the opposite of what is being considered. The debate is over what resolutions should be adopted. As long as the Republicans hold out, the debate continues over whether or not the President's policy is a good one or not. The debate also continues over whether or not the Liberals in Congress will vote to cut off funding for the troops.

What Democrats like Reid are really concerned about is that the Rogers resolution stating that Congress will not cut off funding will pass, and the other resolution, the Levin/Warner resolution will fail. That is the real concern, and it also reveals that this is strictly a political ploy, not a real expression of concern over policy decisions of the President.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below