When Republican senators start feeling antsy

For all of the talk from war supporters about lowering expectations for September — John McCain has been at it, as has Gen. Petraeus himself — it appears the train has already left the station. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who no one would reasonably describe as anything but a very conservative Bush loyalist, appears to have climbed aboard.

[Sessions] indicated Sunday that Republicans will be ready by September to look at bipartisan efforts to draw down the troops that were part of the surge to help secure Baghdad.

“We have to be realistic,” Sessions said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “We have to know that we can’t achieve everything we’d like to achieve. We have a limited number of men and women we can send to Iraq, and we can’t overburden them.”

The senator added that, when General David Petraeus is reporting back on the progress of the surge in September, “I think most of the people in Congress believe, unless something extraordinary occurs, that we should be on a move to draw those surge numbers down.” […]

“I don’t think we need to be an occupying power,” said Sessions, who hopes that bipartisan solutions can be found on Iraq. “This is a fine line we’ve walked, and this surge has got to be temporary…. We cannot sustain this level, in my opinion, in Iraq and Afghanistan much longer.”

When Chuck Hagel makes comments like these, it’s expected. When Jeff Sessions makes them, it’s unusual.

In the broader context, Sessions appears to be part of a trend. Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) recently said he “won’t be the only Republican, or one of two Republicans, demanding a change in our disposition of troops in Iraq” by September. Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) said he’ll need to see “significant changes” by September. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) wants a change if the policy isn’t working “by the time we get to September.” Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) said, “There is a sense that by September, you’ve got to see real action on the part of Iraqis. I think everybody knows that, I really do.”

We’ll see. Anyone who has ever bet on congressional Republicans bucking the White House on war policy has lost money. That said, whether war supporters like it or not, September is circled on DC’s calendar.

When the time comes, September will turn into October or November so fast, it’ll make our heads spin.

  • Right Sara Beth. Nothing will happen. They’re just conning us and themselves. They are a collection of amoral lap dogs for Bush.

  • I’m wondering how they will lower the actual definitions of progress. If there’s anything can can be reasonably spun into a sign of progress, these repubs will be forced to stay on board.

    The problem is that there aren’t war supporters left who I’d accuse of ‘reasonable.’ The reality challenged wingnuts will spin their hearts out to get the repubs back on board for yet another, one last Friedman Unit. Whether it works or not, it should be quite a circus.

    We’re at the point in the Lumberjack Song where the mounties know something’s not right. Will they hold together for another chorus when someone calls out, “He’s a Lumberjack”? Or, will they exit, stage right?

  • Wake me up, when September ends…

    “There is a sense that by September, you’ve got to see real action on the part of Iraqis. I think everybody knows that, I really do.”

    [Gasp!] He’s not talking about … benchmarks, is he? Bad ReThuglican, no lobbyist sponsored trip to Hawaii! Or maybe he’s just talking out of the usual orifice. Never mind.

    Thing is, we’ve already seen plenty of real action on the part of the Iraqis. Much of it conveys the message that they really would like the foreign bastards to get the fuck out of their country.

    tAiO

    p.s. Did anyone see Chris Shays hacking it up on TV last night? I only heard him say something to the effect that we hadn’t spent money as wisely as we could have in Iraq, and then I had to go puke.

  • Comments are closed.