Via Atrios, Hillary Clinton has told ABC News in an interview in Baghdad that it's time to start bringing the troops home. "Clinton said it is time to start re-deploying U.S. troops out of Iraq," ABC says, quoting her as follows: "That would really demonstrate to the Iraqis that we don't have an open-ended commitment," she said. "We are not going to be here providing protection for their leaders, which we do. We are not going to be here standing by and trying to be called in from time to time as they see fit. That is not in the cards." Clinton also noted that the level of security was much higher than her first visit two years ago; on this trip, ABC reports, she had to wear body armor and was surrounded by soldiers.
If you want to know already whether Barack Obama is running for President, you may have only a few days left to wait. The Associated Press reports that senior Obama adviser Steve Hildebrand has been telling Iowa supporters that the final word may be coming early next week. (Keep in mind that Monday is Martin Luther King day.) AP also reports that should he run, Obama will base his campaign in Chicago. Says onetime Gore adviser Donna Brazile: "As far as I can see, he's in the race."
In the wake of President Bush's "surge" speech, Rasmussen Reports has today recorded an approval rating of 35% for the President -- "the lowest level of approval ever measured by Rasmussen Reports," according to the firm. What makes this even more striking is the fact that Rasmussen has generally recorded better numbers for the President than other pollsters. According to Rasmussen, Bush's numbers have plummeted at a staggering pace since his speech — from 44% on Wednesday, to 39% on Thursday, to 35% today. That's a nine point drop in the two-days since his televised address. View a screen grab of Rasmussen's polling chart here.
GOP Rep. Tom Tancredo will decide whether to run for President in the "next couple of weeks," his spokesman tells Election Central. Tancredo is visiting Iowa this weekend to "gauge" the "interest" he can drum up in the state, his spokesman, Carlos Espinosa, says. Espinosa adds that Tancredo expects two things to happen on Monday that will help him make up his mind: He expects Barack Obama to announce his Presidential intentions, and also expects Sen. Wayne Allard to declare whether he's seeking reelection to his seat, which Tancredo has coveted "for some time." According to Espinosa, Tancredo is waiting for those two shoes to drop before setting about making up his mind.
So where do GOP Senators stand on the President's plans to escalate the war?
Despite the administration's agressive campaign to garner support for the escalation of U.S. forces in Iraq, the plan is increasingly being met with skepticism where it really hurts: key Republicans in the Senate. And if the President loses his own party, he loses his bid to escalate.
So we're keeping track here at Election Central of which GOP Senators have passed judgment on the plan and what they've said. Here's the tally as it stands now: Seven Republicans firmly against and nine more expressing reluctance or skepticism.
Our full rundown of who stands where is after the jump -- and we'll update it as new info comes in. Have we missed anyone? Let us know in comments or by email (talk at talkingpointsmemo.com).
As Josh noted over at TPM, Senator Joe Lieberman has just taken the very surprising step of revealing to Newsweek via an aide that he will not use his chairmanship on the Homeland Security committee to aggressively probe the government's catastrophic failings in the wake of Hurricane Katrina — in direct contradiction of statements he made during last year's campaign. In other words, Lieberman's basically letting the White House off the hook for its largest domestic policy disaster to date.
We thought this punt by Lieberman was pretty eye-opening. So we decided to call all the Dem Presidential hopefuls, all the Dems on Homeland Security, and a few Gulf Coast pols to get their reaction to it. More after the jump.
The polls keep coming -- and they keep showing rock-bottom support for President Bush's plan to escalate the war in Iraq. The latest comes courtesy of CNN, which has just released a poll finding that two in three Americans -- 66% -- oppose sending more troops, 50% strongly. Only 31% think the additional troops will make it "more likely" that the U.S. will achieve its goals in Iraq. Strikingly, Dems hold a 17-point edge on the question of who Americans trust more to handle Iraq: A slight majority of 51% trust the Dem Congress more, while only 34% placed their trust in the President. The poll was taken Thursday -- after Bush's speech the night before. Full poll results here.
Florida politicians are angling to move up its primary to only a week after the New Hampshire contest — a move that would upend the electoral calendar by placing a large state into an early position in the process, the Associated Press is reporting. A bill is making its way through the legislature with wide backing from both parties to hold the Florida primary only a week after New Hampshire, which would be on the same day — and thus overshadow — South Carolina.
People pushing the plan claim it would bring a more diverse electorate into play earlier in the game. But opponents, who will likely include the national parties, argue that such a move would favor well-funded, better-known candidates who can afford the high campaign expenses of running in a large state early on — seriously hurting lesser-known, less-flush candidates who might otherwise have been able to gain ground in early small-state primaries. It's unclear as of this writing when the legislature will make their final decision.
GOP Rep. Tom Tancredo is headed to Iowa today to kick off a weekend of public book signings. Could it be the start of the anti-immigration hardliner's nascent campaign for President? Quite possibly. The Des Moines Register is reporting that Tancredo will announce his '08 intentions during his trip through the state. Tancredo will be in Iowa through Monday -- maybe he'll announce on MLK Jr. day.
After a midterm election in which Dems already picked up 30 GOP-held House seats, are there really another 35 such seats in play going into the 2008 elections? Yes, according to a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee memo written by DCCC chair Chris Van Hollen that was sent out today to "interested parties" (i.e., donors and the media).
"I am in the process of targeting open seats, districts where Republicans won by less than 5%, seats won by Kerry in the 2004 Presidential election and districts occupied by ethically challenged incumbents," Van Hollen writes. He adds that there are 20 GOP House seats where the GOPer won by than 5 percent of the vote.
Van Hollen also promises an aggressive effort to continue pummeling GOP incumbents on ethics questions. "The 2006 cycle proved that ethics matters to average voters," he writes. "While there were several Republicans defeated this past cycle as a direct result of their ethical lapses, a handful returned to Washington and should be considered among the most vulnerable. We will aggressively work in districts targeting ethically challenged incumbents like Tim Murphy (PA-18), Gary Miller (CA-42), Rick Renzi (AZ-01), John Doolittle (CA-04), Jerry Lewis (CA-41) and Vito Fossella (NY-13)."
Of course, this is hardly the whole story, since plenty of Dems also picked up seats by less than 5% of the vote, and resources will have to be invested in retaining those seats. A quick Election Central tally shows that nearly half the House seats picked up by Dems -- 13 -- were also won by less than 5% of the vote. So the memo tells only part of what's going on.
Still, our quick tally does show that there were significantly more seats held by the GOP within a 5% margin (20) than there were Dem pickups with that margin (13). So maybe Van Hollen is right when he writes that Dems are "aggressively on offense."
* John McCain has picked up a key endorsement in South Carolina: Secretary of State Mark Hammond. McCain is also heading to Alabama on Monday, Martin Luther King Day, to attend the inauguration of Republican Governor Bob Riley to a second term. Alabama will holds its primary on Feb. 5, 2008.
* Rudy Giulianiis dismissing the issues raised in his leaked campaign playbook — relating to his liberal social stances and past divorces — saying, "I sure have strengths and weaknesses ... I think that sort of puts me in the same category as just about everybody else that's running."
* Rep. Ron Paul, R-TX, has filed papers to run for the GOP nomination for President. Paul was previously the Libertarian nominee for President in 1988.
Update: In down-ticket news in New Hampshire, Democratic Portsmouth Mayor Steve Marchand announced that he will run against GOP Senator John Sununu. He said his decision was clinched by the DSCC's announced targeting of the race and the decision by former Governor Jeanne Shaheen, who narrowly lost to Sununu in 2002, not to run.
This is interesting. On Sunday -- the day before Martin Luther King day and the 40th anniversary a famous speech by MLK against the Vietnam war -- John Edwards is coming to Harlem to deliver an antiwar speech, a move that will inevitably be interpreted as an invasion of the turf of potential Presidential rival Hillary Clinton, who has been distinctly less vocal about the war than he's been. According to today's New York Daily News, Edwards' remarks will be "about Iraq and the need for people in Congress to engage on the issue," in the words of one source. "He'll push for an up-or-down vote on the war."
"While Edwards is not likely to mention Sen. Hillary Clinton by name," the paper says, "his remarks will leave no doubt he has the New York senator in mind when he criticizes the war." Edwards supports Edward Kennedy's bill to block an escalation of the conflict, and a speech this Sunday evoking MLK's opposition to the war 40 years ago could prove to be a powerful symbolic moment that further distinguishes Edwards as the candidate of choice for antiwar voters.
A huge majority of Americans -- three out of four, or 75% -- thinks that President Bush should get Congressional approval for his plan to escalate the war in Iraq, according to a new CBS News poll. Just as strikingly, less than three in 10 Americans -- 28% -- have confidence in Bush's ability to make decisions about Iraq. Meanwhile, nearly seven in 10 -- 68% -- are "uneasy" about his ability to do the same. Full poll results here.
"It's bad policy to speculate on what you'll do if a plan fails when you're trying to make a plan work."
-- Condoleezza Rice, quoted in The Washington Post speaking at today's hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (special thanks to TPM Reader SW for the tip)
The skirmishing between Mitt Romney and Sam Brownback for the support of conservatives is getting more enetertaining by the day. As we reported early this week, Brownback trumpeted the backing of a slew of prominent social-conservative activists in Massachusetts he'd won over, many of whom suggested that conservatives shouldn't feel secure about Romney's commitment to the cause.
Now Romney's respnded in kind, releasing his own letter from a bunch of Massachusetts conservative activists who say that Romney actually can be trusted on their issues. The letter — which you can read here in our TPM Document Collection — praises Romney's record as Governor on issues from abortion to gay marriage and excuses his past lapses into liberalism. Key quote:
"It is clear that Governor Romney has learned much since 1994 – to the benefit of our movement and our Commonwealth. In fact, the entire nation has benefited from his socially conservative, pro-family actions in office. As we explained earlier, his leadership on the marriage issue helped prevent our nation from being plunged into even worse legal turmoil following the court decision that forced 'gay marriage' upon our Commonwealth."
Senator Tim Johnson's recovery after emergency brain surgery has hit a milestone: He's beginning to speak. Johnson's office has just a released a statement that quotes Johnson doctor Vivek Deshmukh as follows: "Yesterday, Senator Johnson underwent an MRI which showed that his speech centers were spared of injury. This is confirmed by the fact that he is following commands and has started to say words."
Here's a key number buried in today's Washington Post/ABC News poll on President Bush's speech: A surprising 53% support Democratic efforts to cut off funding for additional troops, while only 44% oppose it. The survey also found that only 36% said they support Bush's escalation plan. A solid majority -- 61% -- oppose escalation, with 52% opposing it "strongly." The poll was taken after the President's speech last night. Meanwhile, the new Associated Press-Ipsos poll finds an even larger majority against escalation: 70%.
Is yogurt mogul Gary Hirshberg the man for the Dems against New Hampshire GOP Senator John Sununu? The New Hampshire Union Leader reports that Hirshberg, the CEO of Stonyfield Yogurt, is considering whether to try and unseat Sununu in 2008. Hirshberg is a long-time Dem donor who has been raising cash for Tom Vilsack. Chuck Schumer has listed New Hampshire as a top target for Dems in 2008, in the wake of massive gains there this past November.
In addition to a potential self-financing candidacy by Hirshberg, the Union Leader also reports that the following other Democrats are thinking about whether to jump into the race: State Senator David Gottesman, Portsmouth Mayor Steve Marchand, and former Governor Jeanne Shaheen, who lost to Sununu in 2002.
On an interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News last night, Rudy Giuliani made a rather startling claim: He said that "many" Democrats recently were in favor of escalation in Iraq! Watch it below:
Here's a transcript:
SEAN HANNITY: But as I listen to even the lead up to the President's speech tonight, how many Democrats, they're now threatening to do everything they can do legislatively, to cut off funding for the new troops?
RUDY GIULIANI: I'm a little, I'm really confused about it, because I think it was only a month ago that many of these Democrats were talking about increasing the number of troops in Iraq.
HANNITY:
By the way, I have a list --
GIULIANI: Putting more boots on the ground --
HANNITY: Biden, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid all said the same thing.
GIULIANI: You sort of get the feeling, you get the feeling, that if he hadn't put in more troops, instead of attacking him this way, they would say, "we should've put more troops in." Or at least some of them would have. They have said that before.
What is this man talking about?
The only Dems we can think of aside from Joe Lieberman who supported escalation in any form are Rep. Silvestre Reyes and Rep. Nancy Boyda, who recently said she'd vote to fund more troops but remained skeptical of the plan. Can anyone think of anyone else?
What we've clearly got here is an emerging new talking point. Many Dems have criticized the Bush administration for not sending enough troops -- that is, back when it would have made a difference. That fact is now magically being transformed into the idea that Dems have been generally supportive of escalation now and in the recent past -- that is, when it's almost certainly too late to make a difference.
Sure, it's hardly surprising that Hannity would try a ruse as transparent as this one, but Giuliani? The guy who's never afraid to say what he really thinks? Unimaginable!
Senator Barack Obama hasn't declared that he's running for President yet, but he's just hired three new top campaign staffers. The Chicago Sun-Times reports that Obama is expected to tap David Plouffe, a former executive director of the DCCC, as his campaign manager. He's also signed up DNC research director Devorah Adler and DNC deputy director Shauna Daly to play similar roles in his nascent campaign organization.
Our full and updated list of all staffers on all the Presidential campaigns is here.
John Edwards and Newt Gingrich may be trailing in their respective Presidential fields, but there's one place where both candidates are running strong: North Carolina. Today's News Observer reports that a new poll by the Raleigh-based Public Policy Polling shows that among Democrats, native son John Edwards holds a solid lead with 29%, with Hillary Clinton second at 16% and Barack Obama essentially tied with Clinton at 15%. Meanwhile, on the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani and Southerner Newt Gingrich are statistically tied, with Rudy at 30% and Newt at 29%, followed by John McCain at 22% and Mitt Romney with 6%. North Carolina and a slew of other states will host a primary for both parties on February 5, 2008.
It's a done deal: Denver will host the Democratic National convention. The DNC's release just landed in our in-box:
Washington, DC - Citing the Denver host committee's strong bid and growing Democratic gains in the Rocky Mountain West, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean today announced that Denver will host the 2008 Democratic National Convention Monday, August 25 to Thursday, August 28.
From the statement by Dean himself:
"There is no question that the West is important to the future of the Democratic Party. The recent Democratic gains in the West exemplify the principle that when we show up and ask for people's votes and talk about what we stand for, we can win in any part of the country. Additionally, we have a number of strong Democratic leaders in the West who will be a part of showcasing the vision of Democratic leadership for America as we introduce the next Democratic President in the Rocky Mountains."
That will make many Dems very happy. It came down to a choice between New York's logistical prowess and Denver's prime location as a place to continue building on the party's big wins in the Mountain West. More soon.
As Election Central reported below, a new video surfaced yesterday of Mitt Romney debating Ted Kennedy in 1994. Romney was shown expressing all sorts of opinions -- support for abortion rights, lack of total devotion to Ronald Reagan -- that are considered heretical to the social conservatives who decide GOP presidential primaries, and the video was all over the internet yesterday.
Now Romney has finally responded to all the fuss -- and appears to blame unnamed liberals for finding and releasing the video. The Boston Globe reports that Romney last night called in to a conservative Internet broadcast called "The Glenn and Helen Show" to react to the furor over the video.
"I'm grayer, I'm a little heavier, and I hope I've grown a bit wiser as well," Romney said. "Of course, I was wrong on some issues back then. I'm not embarrassed to admit that. I think most of us learn with experience. I know I certainly have."
Romney went on to tout what he described as the conservative nature of his tenure as governor of Massachusetts, and concluded:
"Now, that's my record," Romney continued. "And maybe that's why people on the other side are dredging up 13-year-old history and attacking me now."
The other side. In other words, the side he was more or less on until he decided it was no longer expedient.
Enter Chris Dodd. The Connecticut Senator is planning to announce that he's running for President on Don Imus' radio show this morning, the Hartford Courant reports. Dodd, who spent part of 2006 traveling to early primary states like Iowa and New Hampshire, doesn't have anywhere near the money and visibility of rivals like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or John Edwards. But he believes that diehard Democrats "will appreciate his long service to the party and its pet causes, from civil rights to women's issues to using more negotiation and diplomacy as foreign policy tools," the Courant reports. No word yet from Dodd himself on his planned announcement.
This certainly isn't going to make Harold Ford, Jr., any new friends on the internet. According to Radar magazine, Ford is set to become the next head of the "moderate" Democratic Leadership Council, replacing outgoing chair and Presidential candidate Tom Vilsack. In a memo obtained by the mag that was written by Ford to DLC founder Al From, Ford appears to accept the gig, writing: "I have enjoyed our conversations and am excited about becoming the Chairman of the DLC."
Intriguingly, the memo also seems to suggest that despite the fact that it was run by Vilsack, the DLC isn't planning to back Vilsack for President, and will likely support Hillary instead. "I assume there will be an effort to help Senator Clinton's campaign, and I would support such an effort," Ford writes. No word in the memo on whether Ford intends to take the DLC in a new political direction; indeed, Ford suggests that he'll see to that it continues on its current course. "You have a proven track record," Ford writes. "It's time to take this model to the next level."
Great Moments In Fox News Dept...Sean "Enemy Of The State" Hannity had another remarkable outing on Fox last night. Hannity was holding forth on the public battle between Rosie O'Donnell and Donald Trump, and he predicted that O'Donnell's show, The View, would tank for the following reasons:
(1) "She tries to dominate."
(2) "She takes over the show."
(3) "She says one controversial thing after another."
(4) "[She will be] almost viewed as cartoonish after a while."
You can't escape it: Hannity is proving himself to be a master of unintentional irony.
The White House has just sent out selected excerpts of President Bush's planned speech tonight calling for escalation of the Iraq war. One line in particular jumped out at us:
Victory [in Iraq] will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship.
The White House has just sent out selected excerpts of President Bush's planned speech tonight calling for escalation of the Iraq war. One line in particular jumped out at us:
Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship.
"The basic problem that you have is that you've got a stubborn jerk in the White House who will ignore anything and do what he wants to do."
-- Dem Rep. Jerrold Nadler, in an interview with The Politicker, explaining why it's important for Congress to cut off funding for escalation. Relatedly, The Politicker has some exclusive details on Nadler's long-shot bill to do just that.
John McCain's call for escalation of the Iraq conflict has turned him into the target of the first sustained ad barrage of Campaign 2008. CNN's political ticker reports that MoveOn.org is planning to spend over $100,000 on ads blasting McCain for his pro-"surge" position in Iowa and New Hampshire next week. MoveOn political director Eli Pariser told CNN that the ads were being timed to Bush's unveiling of his escalation proposal "because this is ultimately his idea that Bush is implementing and primary voters need to know that. "The McCain camp declined comment on MoveOn's plans.
For days and days now, John McCain has been arguing that Joe Lieberman's reelection indicates that the nation doesn't genuinely want to pull out of Iraq — and that a pro-pullout message should not be taken from the overall election results. Today, for instance, McCain said: "Joe Lieberman would never have been re-elected — a strong proponent of the war — against an opponent who was for pullout, if that was the American people's attitude." You can watch McCain make this claim on the YouTube below.
There's a small problem with this argument, however: It's easily torn apart with even a quick look at the available statistics.
First, let's take a look at Connecticut's exit polls. They show that sending more troops had the support of — get this — 15% of voters! Meanwhile, 63% of voters said some or even all troops should be withdrawn, in complete opposition to Lieberman's real position.
Second, given the total number of people who cast their vote for Lieberman, it's nothing short of absurd to say that it's in any way indicative of anything national. According to the final results, a total of 563,725 people voted for Lieberman — in other words, just over half a million in a nation of 300 million people.
Finally, Lieberman won because he was able to misrepresent his views on Iraq, not because voters agreed with his actual views on the subject. Back in July, Lieberman actually said he thought we'd be able to draw down "significant" numbers of troops by now. What's more, Lieberman worked hard to blur the line between himself and Ned Lamont on the Iraq issue. In one ad, for instance, he spoke of wanting to "bring our troops home from Iraq."
The numbers — and Lieberman's own statements during the campaign — prove that McCain's debunked claim is at best false, and at worst dishonest.
Update: The Carpetbagger Report has much more on another key aspect of the mendacity and denial McCain exhibited in his interview today.
It's official: President Bush will send 17,500 new combat troops and 4,000 more Marines to Iraq, the Associated Press is now reporting. This and other aspects of the plan were detailed today by White House officials. View a rundown of the plan here.
In a sign that there may be a price to be paid by Democrats for nominating pro-life candidates, Dem Senator Bob Casey is poised to vote against a key Democratic initiative: A bill providing Federal financing for embryonic stem-cell research. More after the jump.
Josh Benson of The New York Observer has just gotten his hands on an amazing find: Video of Mitt Romney at a 1994 debate with Ted Kennedy, whom Romney was trying to unseat from the Senate at the time. In the debate, Romney -- who's tried to position himself as the GOP primary's only authentic conservative -- forcefully expresses his support for abortion rights and aggressively distances himself from the policies of Ronald Reagan.
Here's Romney on abortion:
"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, that we should sustain and support it. And we should sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice."
And here's Romney on Reagan:
"I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush."
Though we've heard quotes like these from Romney before, video of him saying them in real time is going to make life much more miserable for Romney at a time when he's currently trying to persuade conservatives who have doubts about him that he is in fact a bona fide backer of their views on key social issues. Props to Benson -- who comments here -- for the find.
Mitt Romney is outworking John McCain in the battle for the support of conservative members of the House GOP minority, The Hill reports.
According to the paper, Romney was the first to reach out to House conservatives last year, capitalizing on what the paper calls their "anybody but McCain" attitude. After McCain caught wind of Romney's efforts, he started playing catchup, reaching out to House members who backed him in 2000, the paper reports.
One battleground where Romney is currently beating out McCain is Florida: Two major Florida Congressmen, Tom Feeney and House GOP Conference Chair Adam Putnam, are saying nice things about him and talking about his outreach to them, though neither has made a public endorsement just yet.
McCain's efforts among House conservatives suffered a setback recently when influential Michigan Rep. Pete Hoekstra came out against escalation, which is of course the centerpiece of McCain's platform. Failure to win Hoekstra's support could damage McCain in that key state.
Meanwhile, in another setback for McCain — this time in Iowa — Roll Call reports that "a majority of county Republican chairmen say he is far from the first choice of likely caucus voters."
Tom Vilsack has just become the first Democratic Presidential hopeful to call for a block on funding for additional troops going to Iraq. The Sioux City Journal reports that Vilsack called on Congress to withhold funding for escalation, though he stopped short of saying that Congress should defund the current troop presence in Iraq.
Vilsack's move is an interesting one in the context of Presidential politics, since no other candidate has called for a funding block. But it has ramifications in another way, too: It reveals divisions over Iraq among leading "moderate" Dem thinkers.
Vilsack is chair of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. But, as Atrios notes, Vilsack's call for a funding block puts him directly at odds with another leading light of "moderation," Will Marshall, the head of the Progressive Policy Institute. Marshall has complained that the "activist left" -- which wants a block on funding -- is "out of step with America." As Atrios writes, that would seem to suggest that Marshall believes that DLC chair Vilsack is "out of step with America," too.
With the White House about to launch a troop "surge" almost four years after declaring "Mission Accomplished," they're apparently sticking to a standard line: He never declared "Mission Accomplished," after all! Last night on Countdown, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow was declared the "Worst Person" for his Orwellian statement, "You know that the "Mission Accomplished" banner was put up by members of the USS Abraham Lincoln. And the President, on that very speech, said just the opposite, didn't he?" at yesterday's press briefing. After reviewing the mountain of public evidence against such a proposition, Olbermann told Snow: "I mean, you were hired to lie, at least do it well!"
Rudy Giuliani -- who's pondering a run for President, and hence presumably thinks he's Commander in Chief material -- is refusing to say where he stands on the most important policy question of the moment: Whether we should escalate the war in Iraq. The New York Post asked Giuliani spokesperson Sunny Mindel what his position on the "surge" was, and all she would say was this: "He very much looks forward to hearing" the President's speech tonight. As we've noted here in the past, it's very clear that Giuliani and his advisers haven't thought through what his position on Iraq should be. His silence on a "surge" is yet more proof that his 9/11 mystique is as much curse as blessing, because it's allowed him to avoid answering any tough questions on where he stands on issues. That won't last much longer.
Dems standing up to oppose President Bush's expected proposal to escalate the Iraq war will have plenty of bipartisan cover: At least 10 GOP Senators are expected to oppose Bush's "surge," GOP leaders have told the The New York Times. The revelation is buried deep in this article, which focuses mainly on the fact that Democrats are planning to force the hands of Republican members of Congress with a symbolic vote on escalation. "Republican officials conceded that at least 10 of their own senators were likely to oppose the plan to increase troops levels in Iraq," the Times reports. "And Democrats were proposing their resolution with that in mind, hoping to send a forceful message that as many as 60 senators" oppose escalation. No shortage of cover; nothing to fear.
Dems standing up to oppose President Bush's expected proposal to escalate the Iraq war will have plenty of bipartisan cover: At least 10 GOP Senators are expected to oppose President Bush's expected plan for escalation of the Iraq war, according to GOP leaders who spoke to The New York Times. The revelation is buried deep in this article, which focuses mainly on the fact that Democrats are planning to force the hands of Republican members of Congress with a symbolic vote on escalation. "Republican officials conceded that at least 10 of their own senators were likely to oppose the plan to increase troops levels in Iraq," the Times reports. "And Democrats were proposing their resolution with that in mind, hoping to send a forceful message that as many as 60 senators believed strengthening American forces in Baghdad was the wrong approach." Yep, no shortage of cover. Nothing to fear.
After publicly asserting again and again that he would let military commanders determine troop levels in Iraq, President Bush is poised to order those same commanders to implement an escalation they oppose and have advised against, today's Washington Post reports. Bush is expected to insist that escalation is the only viable option in a speech tonight at 7 P.M.
The Post reports that as recently as last month, Bush reiterated his claim that the commanders should determine troop strength:
"It's important to trust the judgment of the military when they're making military plans," he told The Washington Post in an interview last month. "I'm a strict adherer to the command structure."
Now, however, Bush has chucked that assertion overboard and instead is ordering military brass to do things his way. The paper says: "Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq."
Update: The Associated Press reports that Bush will attempt to make his escalation proposal more palatable to the public by acknowledging that not increasing troop strength earlier was a "mistake."
"Seeking support for a retooled strategy to win support for the unpopular war, the president also will acknowledge that the rules of engagement were flawed," the AP says.
With a decision on whether to run for President fast approaching, advisers to Hillary Clinton say she's likely to base her campaign near Washington, D.C., according to today's New York Times. One adviser tells the paper that while some Hillary advisers are worried that the choice of Washington could make her look too much like a D.C. insider, others dismiss such concerns and think D.C.'s logistically the best choice. “The thing is voters in the end won’t really care where she runs from,” one says. The paper notes that the last person who wasn't an incumbent or vice president to run a successful campaign from around D.C. was Ronald Reagan in 1980.
Meanwhile, the paper also reports that Clinton's expecting to announce whether she's running "in the next several weeks."
