A graphic on Page A5 of the February 5 edition of The Washington Post, “Dissonance in the Senate,” which accompanied an article describing the various nonbinding resolutions on President Bush's proposal to increase troop levels in Iraq, divided legislators into “four distinct camps”: “The President's Men,” “Disillusioned Believers,” “The Common-Grounders,” and the “Stop-the-War-Now Crowd.” The Post asserted that the “President's Men” “back[] the president to the hilt” and “accus[e] administration opponents of emboldening the enemy and embracing 'defeat and disgrace,' ” while the “Disillusioned Believers,” "[l]ed by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.)" are “vexed by what these senators see as a mismanaged war plagued by mistakes” and “want to extract a price.” The graphic did not explain what this “price” would be. Presumably, that “price” was referred to in the next sentence, which stated that the “Disillusioned Believers” will introduce an “alternative resolution [which] calls for strict benchmarks.” However, McCain has not suggested that the so-called “strict benchmarks” have consequences. Moreover, according to McCain, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), the senator described by the Post as leading the “President's Men” group, will co-sponsor the McCain-Lieberman resolution as well.

On February 1, McCain issued a press release on the then-not-yet introduced “alternative resolution” mentioned under the “Disillusioned Believers” header. In his press release, McCain states that one of his resolution's co-sponsors will be Cornyn -- the “le[a]d[er],” according to the Post graphic, of “The President's Men.” The press release also states that McCain's resolution will include “eleven specific benchmarks for the Iraqi government.” However, as the weblog Think Progress noted, on the February 4 edition of ABC's This Week, McCain did not explain what would be the “obvious” “consequences” of failure to meet the benchmarks, saying: “I can't tell you what the other options are, because there are no good options to this.” The resolution, issued on February 5, resolved that “the Government of Iraq must make visible, concrete progress toward meeting the political, economic, and military benchmarks enumerated in the preamble to this Resolution” but did not mention any consequences of failure.

Further, both McCain and Lieberman, as well as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), another “Disillusioned Believer,” according to the Post, have taken positions on Iraq similar to those attributed to “The President's Men.” The Post described one of the characteristics of “The President's Men,” (presumably in contrast to the “Disillusioned Believers”) as “backing the president to the hilt” and “accusing administration opponents of emboldening the enemy and embracing 'defeat and disgrace.' ” Below are statements McCain, Lieberman, and Graham have made supporting President Bush's plan for Iraq and suggesting that resolutions opposed to Bush's plan would “help the enemy” or harm the troops:

McCain

• On the February 4 edition of ABC's Good Morning America, McCain asserted that Warner's resolution is “fundamentally a vote of no confidence in the troops and their mission.”

• In a February 1 press conference with Graham and Lieberman, McCain said of “the other resolutions in circulation” that "[w]e believe that if we send the message to our troops, as I said, that we support them, but not their mission, and believe they'll fail, will ensure failure. And we are convinced that the majority of the American people don't want us to withdraw from Iraq, they want us to succeed in Iraq."

• On January 12, McCain said during an Armed Services Committee hearing that Bush's plans for Iraq, including the troop increase, “will give the Iraqis and Americans the best chance of success.”

Lieberman

• As the weblog Think Progress noted, on the January 28 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, Lieberman asserted that resolutions opposing Bush's plan for Iraq would “discourage our troops” and “encourage the enemy.”

• On January 15, Lieberman said: “I strongly support the President's new strategy for success” and “because I support the President's new plan for success in Iraq, I will, of course, oppose any Sense of the Senate resolution that expresses opposition to it. ... [S]uch a resolution ... will send a mixed message of division to both our troops and our enemies.”

• On January 10, the day Bush announced his plan to send more troops to Iraq, Lieberman warned that “excessive partisan division and rancor at home only weakens our will to prevail in this war” and that "[w]eakness only emboldens our enemy, but united resolution will make our nation safer for generations to come."

Graham

• On the February 4 edition of Fox News Sunday, Graham, like “The President's Men,” asserted that "[i]f we pass a resolution saying this is lost before it's given a chance to be implemented, the enemy will seize upon that, be emboldened, and our troops will be sent off in a disheartening fashion, because these resolutions are terrible ideas."
• On January 23, Graham similarly said: “I believe General Petraeus's new strategy ... is our best chance for success, and I support his new effort. A resolution declaring the new strategy a failure ... will empower our enemies, and be demoralizing to our own troops.”