The Senate has confirmed General Petraeus with no dissenting votes, but they don't seem interested in listening to him, except to quote "dire" soundbites.
The U.S. Senate on Friday confirmed Army Gen. David Petraeus as the next commander of U.S. forces in Iraq even though he supports a boost in American troops that many senators oppose.An excellent point from Kate O'Beirne:
Widely regarded as one the army's brightest commanders, Petraeus, who was confirmed on a vote of 81-0, told senators earlier this week that the situation in Iraq was "dire" but not hopeless.
Petraeus, who has already completed two Iraq tours, will be charged with implementing President George W. Bush's plan to send 21,500 more U.S. troops to Iraq in an effort to halt spiraling insurgent attacks and sectarian violence.
A key Senate committee has approved a nonbinding resolution opposing Bush's strategy. A full Senate vote on that measure and another proposal criticizing the plan could come as soon as next week.
"Rather than back a non-binding resolution of disaproval, why didn't the gutsy Senators, like Chuck Hagel, who are riding the surf of public opinion opposed to the troop surge and taking on a president with approval ratings at the freezing level vote aginst General Petraeus' confirmation? Their convictions hold that he has endorsed a wholly unjustified escalation and will be leading troops on a futile mission. They want a role in the conduct of the war and with the need to win Senate confirmation of Gen. Petraeus the Constitution has given them one, but they have taken a pass. "Hat tip to Instapundit.
Betsy Newmark has more about the Democrats' cognitive dissonance.