Obama On Levin-Reed Failure: "Sad Day For America"
Obama's statement on the failure of the Levin-Reed withdrawal bill in the Senate this morning:
“It is a sad day for America when the United States Senate once again fails to vote to bring this war to a responsible end. The Levin –Reed amendment offers a responsible course to bring our troops out of Iraq, with a hard date to begin our drawdown and a hard date to complete it. I will continue to press my colleagues to turn the page on a war that should never have been fought. I will continue to insist that George Bush be denied the blank check he needs to continue this war. We also need to turn the page on a politics that puts divisive distractions ahead of the interests of the American people. It’s time to leave behind the political posturing so that we can come together as Americans to end this war.”
Dodd has also weighed in just now, denouncing the bill itself as not going far enough to enforce withdrawal by tying it directly to funding. His full statement after the jump.
Dodd:
"This bill will not stop this President from continuing to wage this war. While a firm deadline is necessary, it is not sufficient without it also being enforceable through the power of the purse. Given this President's loyalty to his own failed policy, it is clear to me that anything short of a firm, enforceable deadline that forces his hand will only serve to perpetuate our involvement in this civil war. I will only vote to fully fund the complete redeployment of our troops out of Iraq."Only clarity will end this war, and Congress has spent too long muddying the waters. It is long past time for this Congress to use its Constitutional power to be clear with this President that American people will no longer be funding his war. And we must be clear with the Iraqis as well so that they get their political house in order. We know what needs to be done, and it's high time we did it.
"This President will not act on his own volition to stop thousands of our men and women from being killed in Iraq. Our involvement in the Iraqi civil war has not made our country more secure, yet this President will not heed the belief of the majority of the American public, the opinions of some in his own military, or the clear actions of the Iraqi people who want us out. It is up to Congress to force his hand to end this war, and unfortunately, this bill does nothing to that end."
Comments (4)
Jeremy wrote on September 21, 2007 11:33 AM:Obama's focus more on the actual issue is admirable.
robert ellis wrote on September 21, 2007 12:32 PM:Rather than continue negative rantings, please, somebody take a trip to leaders around the world and put together other proposals about Iraq's present and future.
corinne wrote on September 21, 2007 12:59 PM:I will continue to insist that George Bush be denied the blank check he needs to continue this war.
Not too ironic, is it? If that's how Obama really feels then why did he vote for so many funding bills?
Chris Dodd was more on the money:
While a firm deadline is necessary, it is not sufficient without it also being enforceable through the power of the purse.
If Obama doesn't want to continue to give Bush a blank check, then Levin-Reed wouldn't have done anything anyway had it passed. L-R was nonbinding. Only funding restrictions bind the President
Dodd, oh great one who voted for this war in 2002, has better judgment? Au contraire. Obama has the judgment and his vote was good on this.
And don't give me that crap about voting for funding bills....it was unclear if Bush would go with the Iraq Study Group recommendations. It took some months for it to become clear to me that Bush had absolutely no intention of following any of those recommendations. It also took some time for me to agree that voting against funding was the only option left to the Dems.
Obama will not be voting for any funding bills because he's reached the same conclusions that I've reached about Bush and Bush's commitment to remain in Iraq. It makes me despise even more the Dems in Congress who voted for this misery in 2002.


