GOP Senator Warner "Reconsidering" Support For Webb Troop Bill

[babylonsister]

Why am I not surprised?

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/09/gop_senator_warner_reconsidering_support_for_webb_troop_bill.php

GOP Senator Warner "Reconsidering" Support For Webb Troop Bill
By Greg Sargent - September 18, 2007, 6:01PM

Just when it looked as if Senator Jim Webb's troop readiness bill might pick up enough GOP support to reach the magic number of 60 filibuster-proof votes, we're now getting word that Senator John Warner is reconsidering his backing for it and may vote against it.

So reports the Wall Street Journal in a subscription only article. In a bit of a cruel joke, here's the reason Warner is giving for not backing a measure that would give exhausted troops more rest:

...in an interview Tuesday, the senator said he is "reconsidering his position" in light of the administration's willingness to move closer to him on expediting some reduction in U.S. troop levels this year in Iraq. "It took a lot of convincing to make the first units come home before Christmas," Mr. Warner said. "There is a lot of importance in that."

So, because the White House has indicated that a few thousand troops may be coming home, Warner is now reconsidering a bill that would give more rest to all the troops in Iraq. Yet more evidence that piecemeal measures such as the pre-Christmas withdrawal of a few thousand troops merely give Republicans cover on Iraq and allow them to evade supporting measures that will actually change things in a meaningful way.

If Warner bolts it could be a real setback to the bill, since Warner's backing for it would have given cover to wavering GOP Senators like George Voinovich and Lisa Murkowski to break ranks and back it. Either way, Webb has scheduled a presser for tomorrow morning to make the case for his bill yet again. One imagines that the troops are watching.

[TwilightGardener]

1. Warner's an idiot if he thinks he had anything to do with convincing the WH

to pull out some troops before Christmas--they were due to come out anyway. You ain't helping, old man.

[rodeodance]

2. dems a living a dream I think.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

3. He's full of shit. No way he was going to go against his homies in the first place.

[babylonsister]

5. Yep, he's all bluster. I'm glad he's retiring. nt

[Mz Pip]

4. Can't he do both??

What would be so hard about that?

Mz Pip
:dem:

[AlCzervik]

6. omg why? Warner isn't running again so what is it that they have on him?

there has to be something. shame on you Warner.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

8. You have to consider the possibility that he simply values Republicans, and Bush, more than soldiers

[Lone_Star_Dem]

9. It could be he has some pet project that he wanted to gather support for

So he publicly pretended to side with Webb until he was assured he'd get what he wanted.

It isn't always what one has on the other, as much as it's what one wants from the other.

[annabanana]

7. Warner hates the troops. . . . . .n/t

[MoonRiver]

10. Warner's a Repuke. Nuff said.

Yet some are insinuating that he will actually support Democratic Warner in 2008! :crazy:

[TwilightGardener]

13. I had really high hopes for his last year--that he would stand up and

heed his conscience. Oh well--there goes that.

[MzNov]

11. Sen. Warnout simply got called in

and was promised some big fat juicy earmark or other goody for his state of Virginia. Lots of backroom deals going on with this vote. The repukes are scared to death of Webb's amendment. As they should be. The gas bags who like to make us think they will support Democratic bills are just that: Gas Bags!! and not to be believed or trusted. Do you hear that Chuck??

:grr:

[TwilightGardener]

12. Hey--"Chuck" is the R cosponsor of the Webb amendment, so

he's OK in my book. (If we're talkin' bout the same guy).

[MzNov]

14. Oh, sorry, I mean Chuck Schumer

he's on my crap list this week :-)