Cross posted at VBDems
The actions of Senate Democrats this week are truly remarkable in how they have set forth the kind of leadership needed to win big in 2008. And I'm not just talking about the presidential election. This is about Congressional elections, too, which are just as important. The three events which have sparked my optimism are as follows: The Democratic leadership's new Iraq plan, Sen. Webb's amendment to defund a war in Iran before it starts (supported by Harry Reid), and the sweet news that Swift Boat financier Sam Fox, nominated for Ambassador to Belgium, has suddenly found his nomination tabled by the Senate.
Let's start with the new Iraq plan unveiled by the Democratic leadership yesterday. As stated in the press release:
The Reid Joint Resolution builds on the longstanding Democratic position on Iraq and the Levin-Reed Amendment: the current conflict in Iraq requires a political solution, Iraq must take responsibility for its own future, and our troops should not be policing a civil war. It contains binding language to direct the President to transition the mission for U.S. forces in Iraq and begin their phased redeployment within one-hundred twenty days with a goal of redeploying all combat forces by March 31, 2008. A limited number of troops would remain for the purposes of force protection, training and equipping Iraqi troops, and targeted counter-terror options.
Why is this leadership? Because it sets a timetable for withdrawal, which is definitive, measurable, and achieves our goal of getting our troops out of Iraq. Now that we have arrived at this moment of unity -- the Democrats and the American people -- let us take a moment to give some credit to the pioneers who came up with this idea and fought for this idea for a long time now. Some came earlier, some came later, but their actions, sometimes ridiculed or dismissed, meant something and their moment of truth is now:
August 2005: Senator Russ Feingold introduces a non-binding resolution that calls for a target date of 12/31/06 to have American forces out of Iraq. Link
June 2006: Senators Kerry and Feingold introduce a binding amendment calling for a timetable for withdrawal out of Iraq of 7/1/07. 13 senators vote for it. Link
December 2006: Bipartisan Iraq Study Group issues a report. Included in their recommendations are that most combat troops be out of Iraq by "early 2008". President rejects plan. Link
January 2007: Senator Barack Obama introduces De-escalation Plan that sets a goal of March 31, 2008 whereby all combat brigades are out of Iraq. Link
February 2007: Democratic leadership sets a target of March 31, 2008 to redeploy all combat troops out of Iraq. Link
How is this significant to the 2008 presidential race? Well check who has signed on to this bill here. Hillary Clinton, as well as many other centrist Democrats (45 senators in all). Now I have no dog in this fight, but it's really quite remarkable that the top three presidential candidates (according to national polls) -- Edwards, Obama, and Clinton -- have now all embraced the concept of either a target date or hard deadline date for withdrawal of American troops. Now we can all quibble over who was first, who will actually implement the plan, and so on, but THE IDEA has now been accepted by the mainstream of our party and all of our 2008 presidential candidates. And that is encouraging indeed.
The second piece of good news came from my senator Jim Webb, who came out with an ingenius amendment that deals with the danger of Bush widening the war to Iran. Read his floor speech introducing the amendment here. What this piece of legislation does is defund a war before it starts. Webb:
"Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will prohibit the use of funds for military operations in Iran without congressional authorization. The purpose of this legislation is to restore a proper balance between the executive and legislative branches when it comes to the commencement of military activities.
"I have taken great care in the preparation of this bill to ensure that it will not in any way prevent our military forces from carrying out their tactical responsibilities in places such as Iraq and in the international waters off Iran's coast. The legislation allows American forces to directly respond to attacks or possible attacks that might be initiated from Iran, as well as those that might be begun elsewhere and then carry over into Iranian territory. I have also excluded operations related to intelligence gathering.
"The major function of this legislation is to prevent this Administration from commencing unprovoked military activities against Iran without the approval of the Congress. The legislation accomplishes this goal through the proper constitutional process of prohibiting all funding for such an endeavor. Unlike the current situation in Iraq, where cutting off funds might impede or interrupt ongoing operations, this legislation denies funding that would be necessary to begin such operations against Iran in the first place.
Why does this help us for 2008? It helps show Democrats to be muscular in limiting executive authority which has gotten out of control. It also puts a defunding bill on the board without it being associated with depriving troops of what they need, since the defunding is for a war that hasn't even started. Webb also covers all the national security bases, clearly showing this is about limiting unilateral and insane actions being launched by the president as a Hail Mary answer to all of his Iraq problems. Harry Reid has indicated he supports this plan, and I'm sure other Democrats will follow. Last I read, this amendment will be offered to the defense supplemental appropriations bill, which cannot be filibustered.
The last piece of news I bring to you is especially sweet. Remember Foxy, the Swift Boat financier Sam Fox, who was nominated for Ambassador to Belgium? I'll let Wade Sanders, a former Swift Boat skipper deputy and assistant secretary to the Navy, re-tell the tale:
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing was a study in Washington decorum. For the first hour and a half, senators tossed Mr. Fox fat softballs -- praising his background and family.
Finally Sen. John Kerry had the courage to ask him a straightforward and unemotional question: "Do you believe that the truth in public life is important?" Mr. Fox couldn't quite square his profession of commitment to the truth with his hefty contribution to a terrible lie.
Instead, Mr. Fox repeatedly said he abhorred dirty politics. He said, "I'm against 527s, I've always been against 527s." He also defended it by claiming that he was on the record as being opposed to 527s. Did he simply believe that two wrongs make a right? As the questioning continued, Mr. Fox squirmed, fidgeted and stammered as he struggled to justify the unjustifiable. He delivered a graduate course in hemming and hawing. The most amazing thing we learned during the hearing -- if Mr. Fox is to be believed -- is that he can't remember who asked him to write the $50,000 check to fund the dirty tricks. "I can't tell you specifically because I don't remember".
...
Mr. Fox told Mr. Kerry, "Senator, you're a hero. And there isn't anybody or anything that's going to take that away from you." But, why then did he put his money behind a 527 that tried? At the conclusion of the hearing, Sen. Barack Obama looked coolly at Mr. Fox and observed: "I would have preferred you saying... contributing to this Swift Boat campaign was a mistake and I wish I hadn't done it." Yes, even a "confirmation conversion" would have been salve for the wound Sam Fox and other Republicans so heartlessly inflicted on veterans like me in 2004.
Mr. Sanders also described how completely clueless Foxy is about Belgium, which actually should matter. But the question was -- would the "Washington decorum" dictate that Dems look the other way, and let this guy get his job? Well, Digby had a great post on this. He spent the first part smacking down Lieberman who took money from Fox, sung his praise, and enthusiastically endorsed Fox (even after knowing damn well what Fox had done with his money against Kerry), and then hit us with the good news:
The nomination has been tabled for now.
Yes, yes, yes!!!! A very good start, which will hopefully end in Foxy NEVER getting to Belgium. How is this relevant to 2008? It gives voice to a Democratic Party willing to flex its muscles, fight back, and give notice to right wing attackers and their money men, that a price WILL be exacted on them for their spurious accusations and their vicious attacks.
Of course, there is a "but" to this story as well as my whole diary. This is a moment in time where Dems did good, but it could unravel, if they don't keep up the fight and understand that this is far from over. Digby:
During the hearing for this reprehensible GOP moneybags, John Kerry was appropriately steely eyed and angry. Jim Webb says he won't vote for the guy. The nomination has been tabled for now. But it still isn't settled and it really shouldn't even be a question.
...
It's not that Democrats have to make a note of every slight and issue payback. But they do have to draw some bright lines. The swift boat project was beyond the pale and anyone who had anything to do with it should never be rewarded at the hands of Democrats. If they do not make it a point to hold these people accountable in any way they can, they are the architects of their own demise.
Same goes for the plan on Iraq and the Iran amendment. Never, ever give in to these people. And fight the long fight to stop the war -- not just this week, but every week, until it is stopped.