Chris Dodd for President

There seems to be a little bit of confusion about what, exactly, Levin Reed actually would have accomplished. The short answer is ... nothing.

That's why Senator Dodd voted against the legislation earlier this morning.

Despite pledges about only casting votes to end the war, Chris Dodd was the only Presidential candidate to stick to his guns in the Senate this morning. Here's his statement:

"This bill (Levin-Reed) will not stop this President from continuing to wage this war. While a firm deadline is necessary, it is not sufficient without it also being enforceable through the power of the purse. Given this President's loyalty to his own failed policy, it is clear to me that anything short of firm, enforceable deadline that forces his hand will only serve to perpetuate our involvement in this civil war. I will only vote to fully fund the complete redeployment of our troops out of Iraq." -- Chris Dodd

Levin-Reed bill was, of course, a toothless "compromise" bill, and even that couldn't get support.

Dodd raises the stakes ... The only surprise: Chris Dodd, moving the anti-war target, voted against it on the grounds that it's too weak.

Levin-Reed: The Secretary of Defense shall...

Bush: No, the Secretary of Defense shall not.

Congress: Oh. Well, what now?

Here's Senator Dodd's statement on the Levin-Reed Amendment that failed to tie a deadline to funding, and therefore would not have ended the war.

"This bill will not stop this President from continuing to wage this war. While a firm deadline is necessary, it is not sufficient without it also being enforceable through the power of the purse. Given this President's loyalty to his own failed policy, it is clear to me that anything short of firm, enforceable deadline that forces his hand will only serve to perpetuate our involvement in this civil war. I will only vote to fully fund the complete redeployment of our troops out of Iraq."

"Only clarity will end this war, and Congress has spent too long muddying the waters. It is long past time for this Congress to use its Constitutional power to be clear with this President that American people will no longer be funding his war. And we must be clear with the Iraqis as well so that they get their political house in order. We know what needs to be done, and it's high time we did it."

"This President will not act on his own volition to stop thousands of our men and women from being killed in Iraq. Our involvement in the Iraqi civil war has not made our country more secure, yet his President will not heed the belief of the majority of the American public, the opinions of some in his own military, or the clear actions of the Iraqi people who want us out. It is up to Congress to force his hand to end this war, and unfortunately, this bill does nothing to that end."

Dodd had previously pledged to not vote for Iraq legislation that did not include enforcement of a deadline to funding of the war.

If you want to see the Senate pass Iraq legislation that includes a hard deadline tied to funding, stand with Chris Dodd.

Call on your senators to state clearly and directly: will you support Iraq legislation that does not have a firm, enforceable deadline tied to funding?

Visit: http//chrisdodd.com/StopTheBill.

Here's our statement, from Hari Sevugan, our communications director, in response to Senator Obama's statement on Iraq from earlier today.

"While we are glad that Senator Obama has called for a change of course in Iraq, he isn't clear as to what he will do to make that happen, or when.

Rhetoric and highly nuanced statements are not going to end this war -- strong leadership and clarity will. That's why Chris Dodd has said that he cannot support the reported Levin-Reed measure if it does not have a firm and enforceable deadline.

We urge Senator Obama, and all the other candidates in the Senate, to state clearly and directly whether or not they will support Iraq legislation if it does not include a firm, enforceable deadline to begin and complete the redeployment of troops from Iraq."

We need clarity and conviction, not half measures. Chris Dodd is offering bold leadership. It's time for the other candidates in the Senate to follow suit and tell the country where they stand.

Earlier this week Hillary Clinton said the following about compromising:

“You have to know when to stick to your principles and fight,” she said, “and know when to make principled compromises.”

Yesterday Carl Levin said the following about compromising on withdrawing from Iraq:

"If we have to make the spring part a goal, rather than something that is binding, and if that is able to produce some additional votes to get us over the filibuster, my own inclination would be to consider that."

Today Chris Dodd issued this statement about not compromising on Iraq:

"Now is the time for Democrats to stand our ground, stick to our principles and fight for an end to this war. I know when to make a principled compromise and this ain't one of those times."

Chris Dodd is leading to end the war in Iraq. Will Senator Clinton and other Senators join him in opposing any legislation that does not include a firm and enforceable deadline to complete the redeployment of combat troops from Iraq? Or does Clinton think now is a time for compromise?

No more half measures. Tell your Senators to stand up and send a clear message to President that we are changing course in Iraq.