Playing politics with Iraq

Matthew Hoy
By Matthew Hoy on May 28, 2007

Today's Wall Street Journal features an editorial on last week's belated funding for the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I want to pick out two paragraphs to share. First, on the Democrats:

Hamilton and Madison knew what they were doing when they gave the bulk of the war powers to the President, and it's hard to imagine a more telling vindication of their wisdom than this year's Iraq debate. Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid claim to oppose the war and want it to end, yet they refused to use their power of the purse to end it. Instead, they tried every legislative gimmick imaginable to hamstring President Bush's war strategy without actually having to take responsibility for cutting off funds.

The editorial notes the obvious: All that maneuvering was about trying to appease their antiwar base.

Which brings us back to the current President. Whatever his mistakes as a war leader, Mr. Bush at least hasn't betrayed our allies or troops in the field for the sake of reviving his poll numbers. He was also right to defend the war powers of the Presidency against Congressional micromanagement. His obligation now is to do whatever it takes to succeed in Iraq so that the men and women fighting this war will not sacrifice in vain.

If we rush out of Iraq and leave chaos in our wake, we will be betraying our allies -- both those Iraqis trying to create a democracy there and our coalition partners who have also sacrificed their blood and treasure in this effort.


Why, one must ask, was the suit against Biden's student debt wipe “inevitable”?

Was it because the Biden admin is in flagrant violation of the law, and because *everyone* in America knows it?

Not in Waldman’s view, apparently. | @charlescwcooke

Load More




pencil linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram