Take That, President Bush

From the WaPo:

The Senate delivered President Bush its strongest rebuke yet on the conduct of the Iraq war, voting 98-0 to pass a defense policy bill that codifies the treatment of military detainees, establishes new legal rights for terrorism suspects and demands far more information from the White House on the progress of the conflict.

The measure's controversial provisions must still win passage in the House, but they mark the Senate's most dramatic foray into war policymaking and a challenge to the administration, which has issued a stern veto threat. The Senate rejected a Democratic resolution that would have pressured the administration to outline a plan to draw down U.S. forces in Iraq, but, by a 79-19 vote, lawmakers approved a weaker Republican version that insists on regular reports to Congress detailing the military's progress toward the goal of bringing the troops home.
[...]
"This is a war of values," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.). "We can win this war, ladies and gentlemen, without sacrificing our values."
[...]
The effort to fill that void continued today. Before the final unanimous vote on the entire bill, the Senate approved 84-14 a bipartisan measure on the legal rights of detainees, agreeing to strip suspected terrorists of broad access to federal courts while granting them the right to appeal military trial verdicts to civilian judges.

The agreement was hashed out Monday by Sens. Graham, Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who hope a bipartisan consensus will swamp any opposition in the House and White House. Advocates then hope to make final passage of the defense bill contingent on the inclusion of the Graham-Levin language on detainee legal rights and the McCain provision on torture and abuse.

The one objection to the compromise came from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), who denounced the measure as "untenable and unthinkable," since he said it precludes the Supreme Court from any jurisdiction over the legal treatment of detainees. Specter also saw the compromise as an affront to his committee, which was given no opportunity to consider its implications.

Here's more from the WaPo's Fix blog by Chris Cillizza

In keeping with Senate Democrats' increased willingness to speak out about the need for the Bush administration to set a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq, Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Joseph Biden (D-Del.) offered a non-binding resolution to do just that. It failed 58-40.

On the Levin resolution, only one Republican -- Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee -- crossed party lines to support the Democratic call for a timetable. Chafee sits in by far the Bluest state of any Senate Republican seeking re-election (John Kerry won the state by 22 points in 2004) and faces a serious primary and general-election challenge next year.

Similarly, three of the five Democrats who voted against the Levin proposal represent states carried by President Bush and are up for reelection in 2006: Sens. Ben Nelson (Neb.), Bill Nelson (Fla.) and Kent Conrad (N.D.). The other two Democrats voting "no" were Sens. Mark Pryor (Ark.) and Joe Lieberman (Conn.)

Every Democrat considering the 2008 presidential race supported the Levin proposal, including New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh and Biden; all three of these senators have previously been wary of establishing a timetable for pulling U.S. troops from Iraq.