|
War critics ‘thoughtful,’ not ‘wimps’ |
|
By Jackie Kucinich and Mike Soraghan
|
|
Posted: 07/12/07 07:37 PM [ET] |
Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.) called for comity yesterday during a meeting of the Republican Conference after House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) referred to Senate GOP colleagues favoring a change of course in Iraq as “wimps.”
Wilson declined to comment directly on what Boehner had said during the closed-door meeting. But she referred to a recent critical speech by Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) as “one of the more thoughtful speeches … in the Senate in a long time.”
The exchange came as Boehner tries to hold together his caucus. A fairly united Democratic caucus is seeking Republican defections to increase the pressure on Bush to change course on the war, and the House could vote as early as today on a resolution calling for withdrawal of most troops by April 2008.
Wilson added that the war and the thoughts of her colleagues about the conflict “should always be taken seriously.”
Lugar spokesman Andy Fisher said it was unlikely that the minority leader was referring to the Indiana Republican.
“I doubt that that Congressman Boehner was referring to Sen. Lugar,” said Fisher. “In reading Lugar’s speech, Congressman Boehner would have found Lugar calling for a bold and enduring U.S. presence and leadership in the region, requiring substantial fortitude.”
Wilson, a former Air Force officer, has questioned the Bush plan to increase troop levels in Iraq, but she has voted against all Democratic-backed Iraq war measures. The GOP centrist faced a tough Democratic challenge in 2006 and only narrowly won reelection. She is a top target for Democrats in 2008.
As for yesterday’s comments, House GOP sources said that Boehner and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) were simply urging solidarity among House Republicans, explaining that they must distinguish themselves from their Senate colleagues.
Boehner spokesman Brian Kennedy said the minority leader’s comments were not meant to trivialize the war or the senators’ decisions. Rather, they sought to emphasize the importance of allowing the troop surge to work and urged GOP lawmakers to reserve their judgment on the situation until September, when Gen. David Petraeus is scheduled to brief Congress fully on the progress in Iraq.
“The leader’s comments were intended to illustrate the fact that we just recently voted to give the troops our full support — including ample time for the Petraeus plan to work — and that too much is at stake for Congress to renege on its commitment now by approving what can only be described as another partisan stunt by Democrats,” said Kennedy.
“Their bill will have no impact if passed, other than to give America’s enemies something to gloat about,” added Kennedy.
But Wilson did get some support from GOP colleagues. Fellow centrist Phil English (Pa.) — another vulnerable GOP incumbent — also applauded Lugar’s actions and indicated Tuesday that recent critical comments made by Lugar and Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) had sparked conversations about Iraq among their like-minded House colleagues. English voted with Democrats in opposing the troop surge.
In June, English and Wilson co-wrote a letter to Bush to urge him to increase diplomatic efforts in Iraq by convening opposing factions and trying to move toward reconciliation.
“The question is not whether the war in Iraq will end but rather when and on what terms,” they wrote. “We truly believe it is in America’s national interest to foster reconciliation and stability in Iraq … Such an intense diplomatic effort might focus minds on the important decisions that need to be made by Iraqi leaders and impart a needed sense of urgency where it does not currently seem to exist.”
Meanwhile, there appear to be few fissures in the Democratic Caucus on the Iraq legislation, which is sponsored by House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.). Progressives who voted against the Iraq supplemental spending measure are expected to vote for the bill, since it doesn’t fund the war.
Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.), a leader of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition, says he expects few defections in his group.
Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-Tenn.) noted that he has often been a “hard no” on his leadership’s Iraq bills, but now he is “leaning yes.”
“We’ve got to change direction in Iraq. This resolution authorizes what I’ve always thought we should have,” said Davis.
But another Blue Dog, Rep. John Barrow (D-Ga.), remains opposed to the leadership’s approach on Iraq.
“The idea of timelines to incentivize the Iraqi government is a good idea, but it shouldn’t be written into law,” Barrow said.
“Commanders on the ground need to have flexibility.”
Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.) also said he is “likely” to vote against the leadership’s Iraq bill.
|
