Today, Obama fired General Stanley McChrystal as the commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, and nominated General David Petraeus to take over.
Obama lavished Petraeus with praise and urged his confirmation by the Senate.
OBAMA: He has my full confidence. And I am urging the Senate to confirm him for this new assignment as swiftly as possible.
What will Wisconsin's Senator Russ Feingold do?
Russ "MoveOn.org" Feingold has a record of being openly hostile to Petraeus, or as Feingold would say, "General Betray us."
Here is Feingold attacking Petraeus on September 11, 2007, during hearings on the Iraq war.
When he questioned General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, he didn't even show them enough respect to allow them to answer.
He badgered them.
Full transcript of Feingold's ornery remarks
(Excerpt)
RUSS FEINGOLD: I would like to ask the general his response. What about the situation that we find in North Africa and the other regions? You obviously must take this into account in thinking about your role in Iraq.
GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS: I am not in a position to comment on the resources we have committed to the Maghrib or to other areas. General McCrystal does brief us about once a week on the overall situation, but it is clearly with a focus to how that is affecting Al Qaida in Iraq. For what it's worth, he, the commander of the joint special operations command, and the CIA director, when I talked to them a couple of months ago, agreed that their belief is that Al Qaida central seize Al Qaida in Iraq as their central front in their global war on terror.
That seems confirmed by the communications that we periodically see between Al Qaida central and Al Qaida-Iraq, although that could be changing as a result of the loss of momentum, to some degree, by Al Qaida-Iraq and it's something that we need to keep an eye on, clearly.
FEINGOLD: With all due respect, these two critical leaders here in our government, who I have great respect for, are not willing to seriously comment about how this relates to the larger global fight against terrorism -- the allocation of resources. This is a classic example of myopia. This is the myopia of Iraq that is affecting our ability to look at this as the global challenge it is. And by the way, General, I'd like to know, when will the level of American troops deaths start to seriously decline in Iraq?
PETRAEUS: First of all, if I could just come back to your earlier comment, with respect, Senator, what this is is an example of a commander focused on his area of responsibility area. And that is my mission. It is to accomplish the military tasks that are associated with this policy, not to fight the overall global war.
FEINGOLD: I respect that and I understand, but I guess, in the broader context, here, of our discussions, this is the most critical hearing we've had and yet it's only about Iraq. But go ahead and please answer the question: When can we expect the troop deaths to decline in Iraq?
PETRAEUS: It might be, again, that Admiral Fallon or others would be the ones that, or the chairman, to comment on that. There has been a gradual reduction in deaths in Iraq, since about June, I believe it was. That, unfortunately -- in August, we suffered a number of non-combat related deaths due to two helicopter crashes, although the number of combat deaths was lower.
FEINGOLD: General, just let me follow...
PETRAEUS: We need to see what happens in ensuing months.
FEINGOLD: I want the American people to know that in every single month this year, January, February, March, April, May, June, July, and August, a significantly greater number of troops died than in the previous month in 2006 -- in every single month. And according to my information, there's already 32 this month. So, to suggest that there was some decline in the number in June and July, versus other months, does not address the fact that the number of troops' deaths has greatly increased. And I'm not getting an answer that even begins to suggest when we can tell the American people that the number of troop deaths will decline.
PETRAEUS: Senator, we are on the offensive, and when you go on the offensive, you have tough fighting. That was particularly true, again, during the period immediately after the start of the surge of offenses in mid-June and continued for a while. It appeared to have crested then and was coming down. And, again, we will have to see. We had a tragic loss yesterday, in fact, in some vehicle accidents, that again, you know, are just very, very sad.
At the hearings, Feingold treated Ambassador Ryan Crocker and General Petraeus in such a disrespectful manner.
Will Feingold suddenly show respect for Petraeus because President Bush is no longer the commander-in-chief? Will Feingold be a good Obama soldier and now have confidence in Petraeus?
That would be quite an about-face by Feingold.
Feingold's hostility toward Petraeus is on the record.
It made me sick when Feingold tossed out, "And by the way, General, I'd like to know, when will the level of American troops' deaths start to seriously decline in Iraq?"
He really was saying, "And by the way, General, when are you going to stop killing our troops in Iraq?"
It was disgraceful the way Feingold treated Petraeus in 2007.
We all remember MoveOn.org's infamous "General Betray us" full-page ad that ran in the New York Times.
Here's the text of the ad:
GENERAL PETRAEUS OR GENERAL BETRAY US?
Cooking the Books for the White House
General Petraeus is a military man constantly at war with the facts. In 2004, just before the election, he said there was “tangible progress” in Iraq and that “Iraqi leaders are stepping forward.” And last week Petraeus, the architect
of the escalation of troops in Iraq, said, “We say we have achieved progress, and we are obviously going to do everything we can to build on that progress.”
Every independent report on the ground situation in Iraq shows that the surge strategy has failed. Yet the General claims a reduction in violence. That’s because, according to the New York Times, the Pentagon has adopted a bizarre formula for keeping tabs on violence. For example, deaths by car bombs don’t count. The Washington Post reported that assassinations only count if you’re shot in the back of the head — not the front. According to the Associated Press, there have been more civilian deaths and more American soldier deaths in the past three months than in any other summer we’ve been there. We’ll hear of neighborhoods where violence has decreased. But we won’t hear that those neighborhoods have been ethnically cleansed.
Most importantly, General Petraeus will not admit what everyone knows: Iraq is mired in an unwinnable religious civil war. We may hear of a plan to withdraw a few thousand American troops. But we won’t hear what Americans are desperate to hear: a timetable for withdrawing all our troops. General Petraeus has actually said American troops will need to stay in Iraq for as long as ten years.
Today, before Congress and before the American people, General Petraeus is likely to become General Betray Us.
MoveOn, propaganda arm of the Democrat party, told the world that liberals considered Petraeus to be a traitor. Feingold agreed with MoveOn.
The attack was a bad move on the part of the Democrats, so bad that the U.S. Senate actually voted on Cornyn Amendment No. 2934, to condemn the ad.
The Senate amendment's statement of purpose:
To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces.
How hard could it be to vote to express support for the U.S. Armed Forces?
For politicians like Russ Feingold, indebted to the hard Left MoveOn, it was too hard to do.
View the Roll Call Vote.
Wisconsin senators split on the amendment. Russ Feingold voted against it. Obviously, he's not maverick enough to bite the hand that feeds him. Herb Kohl voted for it. He could afford to upset MoveOn.org. He's nobody's senator. Unlike Feingold, he didn't need MoveOn, so he could show some decency.
Those voting in support of MoveOn's despicable ad slamming Petraeus were the usual suspects:
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Note: Biden (D-DE), Cantwell (D-WA), and Obama (D-IL) took the cowardly way out and didn't vote. Current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sided MoveOn, not Petraeus. That's a bit awkward given her current position.
But back to Feingold--
He refused to back Petraeus and our military. It was too much for Feingold to vote to "express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces."
I have a problem with that.
Do the people of Wisconsin realize what an extremist Feingold is? Do they get how far to the Left Feingold stands?
If they do, they'll vote for Ron Johnson in November.
No comments:
Post a Comment