Senate Democrats vow to hold all-night debate on Iraq in advance of key vote
Associated Press Writer
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, July 16, 2007, to discuss pending legislation on the Iraq supplemental. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev., right, followed by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., center, and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., arrives for a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, July 16, 2007, to discuss pending legislation on the Iraq supplemental. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
WASHINGTON — The Senate this week will pull its first all-night debate on the Iraq war in advance of a vote on whether to bring home all combat troops by next spring, Democrats said Monday.
The rare, round-the-clock session Tuesday night through Wednesday morning is intended to bait Republicans into an exhaustive debate on the politically unpopular war, as well as punish GOP members for routinely blocking anti-war legislation.
"How many sleepless nights have our soldiers and their families had?" said Democratic Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
Democrats are trying to ratchet up pressure on Republicans who have grown uneasy with the lack of progress and begun questioning President Bush's military strategy.
Republicans shrugged off the planned marathon debate as political theater. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Republicans "welcome further debate" but that there was no reason why the Senate couldn't vote sooner.
The political sparring came as several Republican congressional staffers met privately with Bush aides in the West Wing of the White House to hash out an effective communications strategy on the war.
Read the rest.
Behind the scenes, in the quiet corners of power, beyond the hearing of the public, the Democrats have surely affirmed to each other that General Petraeous must not be given the time to succeed. The Democrats are invested in defeat and in order for them to ensure victory in '08, George W. Bush must lose in Iraq. Whether Petraeous will be successful or not, we don't know, but having sent the man on a mission impossible, we are obligated to give him the time he needs to execute his plan. To do otherwise is shameful.