September 27, 2007

Kennedy and Langevin Vote to Commend Petraeus and Condemn MoveOn

Carroll Andrew Morse

Rhode Island Congressmen Patrick Kennedy and James Langevin both voted yesterday in favor of attaching a resolution to this year's defense appropriations bill commending Iraq War Commanding General David Petraeus and condemning's paid New York Times advertisement questioning his patriotism…

Congress makes the following findings:

(1) General David H. Petraeus was confirmed by a unanimous vote of 8l-0 in the Senate on January 26, 2007, to be the Commander of the Multi-National Forces--Iraq;

(2) General David H. Petraeus assumed command of the Multi-National Forces--Iraq on February 10, 2007;

(3) General David H. Petraeus previously served in Operation Iraqi Freedom as the Commander of the Multi-National Security Transition Command--Iraq, as the Commander of the NATO Training Mission--Iraq, and as Commander of the 101st Airborne Division (Air--Assault) during the first year of combat operations in Iraq;

(4) General David H. Petraeus has received numerous awards and distinctions during his career, including the Defense Distinguished Service Medal, two awards of the Distinguished Service Medal, two awards of the Defense Superior Service Medal, four awards of the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal for valor, the State Department Superior Honor Award, the NATO Meritorious Service Medal, and the Gold Award of the Iraqi Order of the Date Palm; and

(5) The leadership of the majority party in both the House of Representatives and the Senate implored the American people and Members of Congress early in January 2007 to listen to the generals on the ground.

(b) It is the Sense of the Congress that the House of Representatives--

(1) recognizes the service of General David H. Petraeus, as well as all other members of the Armed Forces serving in good standing, in the defense of the United States and the personal sacrifices made by General Petraeus and his family, and other members of the Armed Forces and their families, to serve with distinction and honor;

(2) commits to judge the merits of the sworn testimony of General David H. Petraeus without prejudice or personal bias, including refraining from unwarranted personal attacks;

(3) condemns in the strongest possible terms the personal attacks made by the advocacy group impugning the integrity and professionalism of General David H.Petraeus;

(4) honors all members of the Armed Forces and civilian personnel serving in harm's way, as well as their families; and

(5) pledges to debate any supplemental funding request or any policy decisions regarding the war in Iraq with the solemn respect and the commitment to intellectual integrity that the sacrifices of these members of the Armed Forces and civilian personnel deserve.

The resolution passed the House by a vote of 341-79.

Senators Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse voted against a similar measure in the Senate last week.

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

Very ironic, since MoveOn was founded during the Clinton impeachment crisis and took its name from the MODERATE position it espoused: censure the president and move on.
But then, I don't consider Patches a liberal any more (anybody who uses the prestige of his office to back the likes of Ralph Mollis hasn't a liberal bone in his body) and Langevin never really was. Their vote doesn't surprise me. If it gets Congress back to the business of getting us the Sam Hill out of Iraq, it's all good.

Posted by: rhody at September 27, 2007 11:07 AM

Patrick "I never worked a F-ing day in my life" Kennedy isn't a liberal? What is he? A communist?

Posted by: Greg at September 27, 2007 11:09 AM

The ad was shameful.

The fact that either the House or the Senate spent their time drafting, debating, etc., a resolution on this issue is pathetic.

Posted by: brassband at September 27, 2007 12:35 PM

Even with a race in '08, Reed doesn't need to worry about re-election.
Whitehouse has another 4+ years before he has to justify/rationalize any votes.

Kennedy is safe for now, but he needs to watch his back (hence his Iraq War vote preceding the Navy Seal (who-turned-out-to-be-a-sleazebag) challenge).

Langevin could go down to the right candidate, so you will see him proceeding very cautiously. Avedesian could take him out if he works hard and smart.

Conclusion: note of the four has any principles. Reed can afford to romance the far left. Watch Sheldon distance himself as we get closer to 2012.

Posted by: George at September 27, 2007 2:48 PM

This administration has lied repeatedly. Why not question Petraeus?

Posted by: PDM at September 27, 2007 8:59 PM

I'm a registered Democrat, and, quite frankly, I found Senator Reed's and Senator Whitehouse's refusal to condemn for its ad in the NYT to be
cheap and cheesey. Especially Jack Reed.
I'm ashamed of both of them!

Posted by: bam in barrington at September 27, 2007 11:53 PM

An interesting split in Rhode Island's Congressional delegation.

Posted by: Monique at September 28, 2007 12:15 AM

This whole motion is a joke, and Reed and Whitehouse were well within their rights to treat it as one.
If Senate condemnation of MoveOn ads is going to become the new standard for things that require debate and floor votes, we should be having one every time Bill O'Reilly sticks his foot in his mouth. After all, MoveOn is a bigger threat to dmeocracy than the Taliban, right?

Posted by: rhody at September 28, 2007 11:09 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Important note: The text "http:" cannot appear anywhere in your comment.