Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
Washington Post
February 9, 2007
Pg. 3
10 Republicans Among 14 'No' Votes
By Josh White, Washington Post Staff Writer
The Senate voted 83 to 14 yesterday to confirm Gen. George W. Casey Jr. as the Army's new chief of staff, a tally that included 10 Republicans voting against the general who has commanded the Iraq war for the past 2 1/2 years. Though a vast majority of the senators supported Casey's ascension to the Army's top post, several powerful Republicans decried what they regard as Casey's leadership failures amid a deteriorating situation in Iraq.
The vote allowed some Republicans wary of taking a public stand against President Bush's current strategy in Iraq to speak out against the conduct of the war. Though the senators almost unanimously praised Casey's service to the nation, some lashed out at his 30-month tenure as the top commander in Baghdad.
Sen. John E. Sununu (R-N.H.), who has at times evaded questions about the president's plan to secure Iraq, said that Casey's tour saw a steady deterioration in the country's security. "There are many factors that contributed to the failure to improve the situation, but ultimately our military leadership has to bear some responsibility for its choices," Sununu said. "Simply put, we shouldn't reward a lack of success on the field of command with such an important promotion."
More than a fifth of the Republicans in the Senate voted against Casey, including influential members of the Armed Services Committee, which grilled the general during a contentious confirmation hearing last week. Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the panel's ranking GOP member, joined three other Republicans on the committee in opposing Casey's confirmation: Sens. John Ensign (Nev.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) and Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.).
Chambliss said yesterday that he has been unimpressed with Casey's leadership, criticizing him for maintaining his position that the United States did not need additional forces in Iraq even as the war worsened.
"I've been a big supporter of the president on the war itself. My only questions have come . . . with deployment of additional troops, but my concerns have been addressed and answered," Chambliss said, citing his concerns about Casey's strategies. "I think it's a bad decision to put old ideas in place."
Graham said that he voted against Casey because he thinks it is time to stop being overly optimistic about the war. "We have slowly but surely gone backwards, and that strategy General Casey was implementing was not working," Graham said. He added that the administration is now betting everything on the buildup of troops in Iraq. "If this is all in, which I think it is, I'm not so sure I want him to play the hand."
Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, voted in favor of Casey's confirmation.
"It is not fair that General Casey be tagged with failures, massive failures which were caused by the false policies, the wrong policies, the deceptions, the ignorance, the arrogance, the cockiness of civilian leaders in this administration," Levin said.
Army officials close to Casey said yesterday that he is extremely honored by the confirmation. He could not be reached in Iraq because of the late hour there.
Confirmations of Army chiefs of staff have almost always lacked controversy, but Casey's comes as the U.S. public is growing weary of the Iraq war and as Congress is split over the way forward. According to Senate records dating to 1930, there has been only one other contested confirmation vote for an Army chief, when Gen. Creighton W. Abrams Jr. was confirmed in late 1972. The Senate approved Abrams in an 84 to 2 vote during the Vietnam War.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
February 9, 2007
Pg. 3
10 Republicans Among 14 'No' Votes
By Josh White, Washington Post Staff Writer
The Senate voted 83 to 14 yesterday to confirm Gen. George W. Casey Jr. as the Army's new chief of staff, a tally that included 10 Republicans voting against the general who has commanded the Iraq war for the past 2 1/2 years. Though a vast majority of the senators supported Casey's ascension to the Army's top post, several powerful Republicans decried what they regard as Casey's leadership failures amid a deteriorating situation in Iraq.
The vote allowed some Republicans wary of taking a public stand against President Bush's current strategy in Iraq to speak out against the conduct of the war. Though the senators almost unanimously praised Casey's service to the nation, some lashed out at his 30-month tenure as the top commander in Baghdad.
Sen. John E. Sununu (R-N.H.), who has at times evaded questions about the president's plan to secure Iraq, said that Casey's tour saw a steady deterioration in the country's security. "There are many factors that contributed to the failure to improve the situation, but ultimately our military leadership has to bear some responsibility for its choices," Sununu said. "Simply put, we shouldn't reward a lack of success on the field of command with such an important promotion."
More than a fifth of the Republicans in the Senate voted against Casey, including influential members of the Armed Services Committee, which grilled the general during a contentious confirmation hearing last week. Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the panel's ranking GOP member, joined three other Republicans on the committee in opposing Casey's confirmation: Sens. John Ensign (Nev.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) and Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.).
Chambliss said yesterday that he has been unimpressed with Casey's leadership, criticizing him for maintaining his position that the United States did not need additional forces in Iraq even as the war worsened.
"I've been a big supporter of the president on the war itself. My only questions have come . . . with deployment of additional troops, but my concerns have been addressed and answered," Chambliss said, citing his concerns about Casey's strategies. "I think it's a bad decision to put old ideas in place."
Graham said that he voted against Casey because he thinks it is time to stop being overly optimistic about the war. "We have slowly but surely gone backwards, and that strategy General Casey was implementing was not working," Graham said. He added that the administration is now betting everything on the buildup of troops in Iraq. "If this is all in, which I think it is, I'm not so sure I want him to play the hand."
Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, voted in favor of Casey's confirmation.
"It is not fair that General Casey be tagged with failures, massive failures which were caused by the false policies, the wrong policies, the deceptions, the ignorance, the arrogance, the cockiness of civilian leaders in this administration," Levin said.
Army officials close to Casey said yesterday that he is extremely honored by the confirmation. He could not be reached in Iraq because of the late hour there.
Confirmations of Army chiefs of staff have almost always lacked controversy, but Casey's comes as the U.S. public is growing weary of the Iraq war and as Congress is split over the way forward. According to Senate records dating to 1930, there has been only one other contested confirmation vote for an Army chief, when Gen. Creighton W. Abrams Jr. was confirmed in late 1972. The Senate approved Abrams in an 84 to 2 vote during the Vietnam War.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.