Even though they vowed to slash Bush's war budget:
However, newly-empowered Democrats on military affairs committees say they've thrown away the rubber stamp Republicans used for President Bush's war budgets. They have concluded that the Pentagon has padded its emergency requests with expensive equipment not directly related to the fighting in the rugged Afghan countryside or the guerrilla-style combat US troops face in Iraq.They will be giving him what he asked for:
Senate Democrats will unveil a 2008 budget today that would boost spending for uninsured children, students and veterans without cutting funds for defense or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.Meet the new Congress, same as the old Congress. So, what happened to giving the people what they asked for in November? Didn't they ask for change? Didn't they ask for an end to the war? (Well, at least the Democrats and the MSM think they did.) It seems like the same old song: "I promise to do ____ until I'm in office and then I will do the opposite." Fill in the blank with the politician's promise.The budget also would not roll back any of President Bush's tax cuts after 2010, when they are set to expire. It says the tax cuts can be extended if they are paid for.
The spending plan, to be voted on Thursday by the Senate Budget Committee, is more specific about its additions than its subtractions. Most decisions on how to pay for new spending or tax cuts are left to the committees that will turn the budget blueprint into legislation.
"We do not tell them how to raise the money," said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who chairs the budget panel. "We do not tell (them) how to spend the money."
In fact, the budget is most notable for what it would not do, despite Democrats' attacks: reduce Bush's war spending or tax cuts. Senate Democrats do not want to be seen as hurting troops or taxpayers. House Democrats will unveil their proposal next week.
Meanwhile, there will be a debate on Iraq in the Senate, even though they will not end the war by de-funding it, they will try micromanage it:
Democrats in the Senate planned to begin debating on Wednesday a resolution to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq, but Republicans made clear they opposed the measure and would try to prevent its passage.I hope that Republicans aren't dumb enough to vote for this thing.
Some Republicans said on Tuesday events in Iraq had convinced them it was better to go ahead and debate President George W. Bush's war policy than block consideration of Democratic proposals to change the policy for a third time.
"The surge is underway," said Mississippi Republican Sen. Trent Lott, referring to Bush's recent decision to add about 26,000 troops to the Iraq conflict. "There are some positive signs here."
Republicans will not stop the Senate from considering the Democrats' withdrawal plan in a procedural vote expected on Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, told reporters.
[...]
Democrats said they did not know if they could muster a majority for the measure in the narrowly-divided chamber.
Under the plan, the United States would begin withdrawing soldiers from Iraq within four months. It sets a goal of pulling out all combat troops by March 31, 2008.
[...]"I start with 49," Reid said. "Unless you get some Republicans it's hard to get to 50, even with modern math."
Even after debate begins, Republicans could still block a final vote. Under Senate rules, most procedural motions require 60 votes out of the 100-member Senate to pass.
And in Iraq, progress, this time political (which everyone says is the only way to end this war):
For months in this battered city, Sunni Muslim militants took over mosques and used their loudspeakers to broadcast propaganda. So a few weeks ago, U.S. soldiers went to the local market, bought speakers and placed them on a tall, white tower inside their base.Then they began trying to woo the population with messages from the mayor and local sheiks. The Americans spliced in verses from the Koran, the Iraqi national anthem and the news, and even threw in the latest European scores in soccer, a sport loved by most Iraqis.
[...]
There was no indication whether such tactics have achieved much success, but Petraeus had succeeded in persuading Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to visit a U.S. military base here, his first foray to volatile Anbar province in nine months as Iraq's leader. Maliki was there to show that the Shiite-led central government cared about those outside the capital regardless of their sect, Petraeus said.
The visits Tuesday illustrated the multi-pronged approach -- melding military, political and economic measures -- that U.S. military leaders say is vital for the success of a four-week-old security plan to tame Baghdad and other parts of Iraq. But the visits to this Sunni insurgent stronghold also displayed some of the challenges confronting the strategy, such as intra-sectarian rivalries and deep-rooted insecurity.
"Ramadi has been under siege, has been out of control for several years," Petraeus said. "This is early days in this particular effort."
[...]
Petraeus had urged Maliki to fly to Ramadi, said Marine Maj. Gen. Walter E. Gaskin, the top U.S. commander in Anbar, who recalled what Petraeus had told the Iraqi leader: " 'You've visited Iran, and you haven't visited Anbar. You need to come and visit your folks.' He responded to that positively," recalled Gaskin.
In closed meetings, Maliki promised to improve electricity services, rebuild the war-shattered infrastructure and compensate residents for property damaged in battles or by insurgent attacks, Iraqi state television reported.
Maliki also met with Sunni tribal sheiks who came from across the vast western province, stretching from Baghdad to the borders with Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Syria.
Many of the sheiks have turned against al-Qaeda in Iraq and other Sunni militants and aligned themselves with U.S. forces and the Iraqi government. The U.S. military has been courting the tribal leaders, many of whom were once sympathetic to the Sunni insurgency, to break with al-Qaeda in Iraq.
Make sure you read the rest. Hopefully the wobbly Republicans in the Senate have read it and it toughens their resolve to do the right thing, support the troops and their mission and give Iraq a chance to rid itself of al-Qaeda (isn't that our enemy?).
