Until now, Republicans have stayed relatively united, at least when it came to congressional floor votes on Iraq — a reality that has made it impossible for Mr. Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to muster enough votes to override a presidential veto of funding cutoffs, withdrawal dates and other moves that undercut troops in the field and tell the Islamists that they only have to wait us out. But now that Republican senators such as Richard Lugar (Indiana), Pete Domenici (New Mexico) and George Voinovich (Ohio) have read the polls and made statements poor-mouthing the latest campaign to uproot jihadists in Iraq, they have earned themselves the sort of "Strange New Respect" once reserved for Republicans who agreed to deals that increased taxes in exchange for budget cuts that never materialized.Emphasis added.
It's important to be at least somewhat grounded in reality about what is significant about the defeatist posture taken by Mr. Lugar et. al. — and what is business as usual for a certain type of Republican. Anyone who remembers Mr. Voinovich's emotional attack against John Bolton (Mr. Voinovich later reversed himself) or his ramblings in response to radio talk-show host Sean Hannity's factual questions about his support (subsequently reversed) for the failed Senate immigration bill understands that he's hardly a thinking man's conservative in the mold of the late Sen. Robert Taft. Mr. Lugar has rarely missed a chance during the past year to state his misgivings about President Bush's approach toward Iran. Mr. Domenici, a former chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, has long been known as one of the congressional Republicans most likely to embrace the tax-increase "compromises" noted above. On the immigration bill, Mr. Domenici was initially a vocal supporter and voted for cloture on June 26. But after hearing what the public thought about the legislation, he voted to kill it two days later.
In short, no one remotely familiar with their records would consider any of them to be among the Senate's conservative intellectual giants. On the contrary, they are poll-driven politicians who want to hold on to power, and the polls indicate that many Americans are decidedly unhappy about the direction of the war. Mr. Domenici said Thursday that while he favored moving U.S. troops "out of combat operations and on the path to coming home," he didn't support an immediate withdrawal of troops or a reduction of funding.
Why do I highlight these comments? Because I just want to illustrate that I'm not the only person who sees this for the tragedy that it is... Voinovich is a laughingstock and a real embarrassment to Ohio.
The real tragedy is that Voinovich is going to raise the white flag and surrender to our enemies. The last sentence of the editorial sums this up best:
Mr. Reid and his "bipartisan" coalition of helpers are poised to send another unmistakable message of weakness to the jihadists starting today.Elections have consequences...
And let's address the "moderate" argument with this bit from Joe Bell, writing for OpinionEditorials.com:
The media has labeled “moderates” those who have begun to grumble words of dissent. There is nothing moderate about those who urge America to abandon the field of battle and allow its enemies to seize victory. One such immoderate voice is that of Senator George Voinovich, R- Ohio, who, in a June 26 letter to President Bush, said, “… we must begin to develop a comprehensive plan for our country’s gradual military disengagement from Iraq and a corresponding increase in responsibility to the Iraqi government and its regional neighbors."Emphasis added.
...
Voinovich wrote, “Though it may seem contradictory, I believe we can accomplish more in Iraq by gradually and responsibly reducing our forces and focusing on a robust strategy of international cooperation and coordinated foreign aid.”
It not only seems contradictory, it is contradictory - indeed, it is delusional - to believe that a reliance on international cooperation and foreign aid will soothe the ire of Iran, al Qaeda in Iraq and their ideological supporters and pave the way for political and social progress. Absent active and engaged U.S. leadership Iraq will become a long-term failed state and a terrorist sanctuary. With respect to Iraq, the Democrats have always preferred to plow the easy field of political expediency instead of laboring in the difficult field of policy. Now the party of the donkey is being joined by some Republicans who are prepared to ignore reality in favor of mythical rhetoric.
...
Voinovich’s call for more international cooperation and foreign aid may sound good politically but the words ring hollow in an arena where suicide bombers and IEDs are the currency of choice. Building upon any progress that has been made thus far is contingent upon ensuring stability and order. That will never be accomplished by an unwise departure of U.S. forces.
...
A U.S. retreat from Iraq would be a resounding victory for al Qaeda and its supporters around the world. Liberals will reply with phrases like “peace is patriotic.” It can be. But willful ignorance is never patriotic and that is the soil in which the liberals plant their policy preferences.
Are Voinovich and his White Flag Republican friends are a danger to our national security? He is showing a pattern of weakness that can not be tolerated. Like Voinovich himself, the Ohio GOP has been extremely silent on the issue. Deputy Chairman Kevin DeWine's letter was quite pleased to point out the efforts of Minority Leader Boehner in Congress, but nary a word on Voinovich. This is why...and it is time we start saying it out loud so we can get used to the idea: Voinovich is done. We can either put up a Republican to compete for the seat when the time comes, or Ohio will elect another far-left, uber-liberal like Sherrod Brown. The choice is ours to make...but the message must be sent right now.
