Commentary - Aaron Keith Harris: Democrats can cure insomnia with cloture

The Democrats knew by Tuesday that they did not have enough votes to invoke cloture on the Levin-Reed amendment. If passed, it would have forced President Bush to start pulling soldiers from Iraq in just two months and to have all but a few out by next May.

But the Democrats decided to have their C-SPAN slumber party.

There was nothing wrong with making the Republicans conduct an actual filibuster, instead of merely threatening one. And both sides can be forgiven for their hypocritical posturing on using the filibuster as a political tactic.

After all, they are politicians, and we know each side’s tune would change if the Republicans were the majority.

I settled in around 11 p.m. Tuesday in eager anticipation of a night filled with profound oratory.

Sometime before I drifted off, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, reiterated a point his party has been hammering for months.

“We are talking about young lives that have a bright future. This is not some political game,” said Harkin. “Why should our government put our soldiers’ lives at risk for a civil war in Iraq?”

At least Harkin didn’t refer to American soldiers as our “children” or “grandchildren,” as many war opponents do.

Both sides did, however, appeal to emotion by reading letters from soldiers’ mothers.

Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., said no one could fully understand the war unless you have a loved one fighting in Iraq.

A nation of grown-ups should disagree. Many of us can’t understand the courage and commitment possessed by a man or a woman who makes the free choice to join the military.

In the Vietnam War, many American soldiers were pressed to fight without choosing to do so, and the draft became the major reason —and rightly so — that public opinion turned against the war effort.

Soon after, we learned our lesson and abolished the draft. Now, the greatest opposition to reinstating it comes from the military itself. They don’t want the burden of baby-sitting troops who don’t want to be in uniform.

But our current soldiers already have made their noble choice, so our civilian representatives should be able to make foreign policy decisions based on what’s best for the country. Anything less dishonors and disrespects our volunteer forces just as badly as calling them “children.”

Such an attitude is not easy to cultivate, but it is necessary for a nation to survive. Abraham Lincoln said as much in the Gettysburg Address.

“It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion,” said that sad-eyed prophet over the graves of dead soldiers.

Lincoln is thought to have based his funeral speech on another given by the Athenian statesman and general Pericles about 2,500 years ago.

Pericles said that Athens was great partly because its men willingly fought for it.

“These take as your model and, judging happiness to be the fruit of freedom and freedom of valor, never decline the dangers of war,” Pericles told his countrymen.

I would sleep easier if a majority in Washington was fully committed to the same principle.

Next time the Senate decides to work through the night, they should consider doing something constructive, like raising military pay, or getting our troops all the equipment and intelligence they need to complete their mission.

Aaron Keith Harris writes about politics, the media, pop culture and music and is a regular contributor to National Review Online and Bluegrass Unlimited. He can be reached at aaronkeithharris@gmail.com.