1 Out of 49 Makes the Front Page

I questioned the wisdom of the Senate GOP leaders when they elected to allow the Iraq debate and vote to go forward after blocking it for several weeks. It turned out to be a good plan (h/t Best of the Web):

The U.S. Senate yesterday took up a series of nonbinding resolutions on Iraq, including one urging a U.S. surrender by March 2008. After Republicans allowed the vote to go forward, Majority Leader Harry Reid warned that they "were playing a dangerous game," according to Reuters:

"They may wind up with a surprise," Reid, a Nevada Democrat, told reporters. "More Republicans than they think may wind up being in favor of this."

Surprise! The vote was 50-48 against, with only one Republican (Oregon's Gordon Smith) joining 47 Democrats in favor. Between two and three Democrats broke ranks and voted against the resolution: Connecticut's Joseph Lieberman, Nebraska's Ben Nelson and Arkansas's Mark Pryor.

What was amazing to me was the fact that one Republican out of 49 voting for this measure was deemed worthy to be a front page story in my local Orange County Register newspaper. Imagine what would have happened if they'd gotten two Republicans? They would probably have had to put out a special edition.

There's one Republican senator who's decided that the rash of non-binding resolutions are a meaningless waste of time and he's not going to vote for any of them, regardless of the author. That senator is freshman Republican Bob Corker from Tennessee who put out this statement:

"I think the American people recognize this debate for what it is--political posturing," said Corker. "The real debate on Iraq will occur in the coming weeks when we take up the supplemental funding bill.

"Congress has spent far too much time debating non-binding resolutions and resolutions that claim to be binding, and I plan to vote against all of them--Democrat and Republican. Though I strongly disagree with their position, if members of Congress want to oppose the war in Iraq they should vote to cut off funding, not pass more meaningless resolutions.

"I've been clear about my position. I believe we must give General Petraeus until mid-summer to see if we can turn the downward spiral in Iraq into an upward spiral so that Iraq has the ability to take over its own destiny and maintain its own security. Therefore I will be voting in the supplemental to give General Petraeus and our troops on the ground in Iraq the support they need and deserve."

Nicely done, Senator, and as James Taranto reminds us, it sounds a lot like Rudy Giuliani's position.