DEMOCRAT DILEMMA ON IRAQ
Have you noticed that Democrats have been unusually quiet about Iraq lately ? The reason is simple. The success that has been well documented which has resulted in thousands of Iraqis returning home because of the decrease in violence combined with the lowest American death tolls since we entered Iraq which has placed the Democrats in a dilemma as to what to say and how to approach Iraq.
Even their staunches ally in promoting leftist propaganda, especially where Iraq is concerned, that being the New York Times, abandoned the Democrat agenda of Iraq failure and ran a full front page story detailing Iraq success.
So what are Democrats to do ? They have invested the last five years in a massive campaign lambasting the President, berating the troops, crying failure and pushing for an immediate pull out from Iraq. Now Iraq is a success and a very great success and Democrats are not only quiet but at a complete loss as to what to do.
Even their recent attempt to force a pull out by attaching a withdrawal measure to a war funding bill could not muster enough votes in a Democrat controlled Congress to pass. Yet the Dems still have to appease the anti - war left while straddling the fence post to satisfy the moderates in the party whose constituency is against their surrender agenda.
When most of the news out of Iraq was negative their agenda was easy to push because discontent over Iraq was high and even the moderates in their party sided with the surrender agenda. Now that success is real an undeniable even for a liberal rag like the Times, their silence proves they have no clue as to what to do next.
If they continue their surrender agenda to appease the far left they risk losing big in the polls during an election year. If they come out in favor of Iraq because of the success, they risk the anger of the far left and losing the base off their party and the source of the majority of their money.
So they remain quiet, secretly hoping that the death toll will rise once again and the success will slow so they can once again cry foul and scream failure thinking the American people will believe their lies and disinformation campaigns.
The trouble for Democrats is that the surge in Iraq has been so successful that it would seem the days of perceived failure are over and the Dems will not have anything on Iraq to cry and whine about to satisfy their base and twist into lies that they believe will garner votes at the polls. Their surrender agenda could very well be the Achilles Heal for the Democrats in the 2008 election.
Ken Taylor
Even their staunches ally in promoting leftist propaganda, especially where Iraq is concerned, that being the New York Times, abandoned the Democrat agenda of Iraq failure and ran a full front page story detailing Iraq success.
So what are Democrats to do ? They have invested the last five years in a massive campaign lambasting the President, berating the troops, crying failure and pushing for an immediate pull out from Iraq. Now Iraq is a success and a very great success and Democrats are not only quiet but at a complete loss as to what to do.
Even their recent attempt to force a pull out by attaching a withdrawal measure to a war funding bill could not muster enough votes in a Democrat controlled Congress to pass. Yet the Dems still have to appease the anti - war left while straddling the fence post to satisfy the moderates in the party whose constituency is against their surrender agenda.
When most of the news out of Iraq was negative their agenda was easy to push because discontent over Iraq was high and even the moderates in their party sided with the surrender agenda. Now that success is real an undeniable even for a liberal rag like the Times, their silence proves they have no clue as to what to do next.
If they continue their surrender agenda to appease the far left they risk losing big in the polls during an election year. If they come out in favor of Iraq because of the success, they risk the anger of the far left and losing the base off their party and the source of the majority of their money.
So they remain quiet, secretly hoping that the death toll will rise once again and the success will slow so they can once again cry foul and scream failure thinking the American people will believe their lies and disinformation campaigns.
The trouble for Democrats is that the surge in Iraq has been so successful that it would seem the days of perceived failure are over and the Dems will not have anything on Iraq to cry and whine about to satisfy their base and twist into lies that they believe will garner votes at the polls. Their surrender agenda could very well be the Achilles Heal for the Democrats in the 2008 election.
Ken Taylor
posted by The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth | 6:57 AM
16 Comments:
I'm not sure what you mean about the Dems being silent on Iraq. This weekend on Fox News Sunday Sen. Levin talked about the fact that there is no political solution in sight among Iraqi factions.
You had Gen. Ricardo Sanchez (who was the commanding general in Iraq for 2 years) call for redeployment in the Democratic radio address just this past weekend.
The point of the surge is to allow the politicians to resolve their differences - that is no closer than it was before the surge. So unless they get their act together - which does not seem any more likely than it was before the surge - our soldiers are fighting and dying for nothing.
That is why your Senator, Lindsey Graham, wants to now pull the plug on Maliki. The Iraqi government is such a failure that you have a Republican Senator who just returned from Iraq and who has been a stauch supporter of the war saying that they need to start over with a new Prime Minister.
By the end of next year we will be redeploying our troops and bringing about an end to our disasterous Iraq war policy. If the current Republicans in Congress don't do it, they know they will be trounced in next year's elections. That is why you have so many Republicans in Congress stepping down and retiring. The inability to find an end to Iraq is the major reason Congress has such low approval ratings. As the election draws nearer we'll see what happens.
If the Democrats come out in favor of Iraq we will throw it right back in thier faces:
Dingey Harry Reid: "The War Is Lost"
Hillary Clinton: "I voted for the war but we didnt get to read all the intelligence" (Complete Bullcrap)
John Edwards: "I never voted for the war to begin with"
Syriana Pelosi: "We must withdraw our Troops now"
John Murtha: "Our Soldiers are turning into war criminals"
John Kerry: "If you dont stay in school and get an education you get stuck in Iraq"
Etc..Etc..Etc..
They will forever be known as the party of Retreat-In-Defeat
Security MUST be stable for any Country to be able to get the Political Process going.
Now that we have pretty much won the ground war, the Politicians in Iraq can now get on with the business of the Country.
All is going to be well if the Democrats just fund the Troops and let them come home with the Victory and Honor they deserve.
Rob,
The Democrats could have pulled the plug on Iraq long ago, they could have just cut off funding period!
But they didnt because they KNEW they would be forever known as the Party of Retreat-In-Defeat. (They will anyway)
Nope, the Democrats have worked themselves into a real pickle.
What was the name of that Democrat who said "If there is success in Iraq, it will be a real problem for the Democrats"?
I think that's self explanatory as to where they stand.
Here's something either of you might find interesting reading:
Democrat's Caught Changing Subject On Iraq
The Dems are not going to simply cut off funding - no Congress would ever do that. Rather, they are working to build a bi-partisan, veto-proof majority that agrees on an end date for our major involvement in Iraq. That is the responsible thing to do.
The goal is to find a bi-partisan plan that results in the redeployment of our troops out of Iraq, with just some remaining in Iraq to provide training to the Iraqi military and to allow for rapid response to al Qaeda uprisings.
The Republicans are going to come around as we get closer to the election. If they don't they will just get trounced in next year's election. It will be far worse than the beating they took in the last election.
Marie, the linked story is completely irrelevant. The point of the surge was not to just reduce violence. The point of the surge was to improve security so the Iraqi politicians could come together and resolve their differences. Only then will there be "victory."
Anyone who has even a basic understanding of the Middle East knows that that won't happen. The Shia and the Sunnis have been at war for centuries. Bush had no clue about the differences between the two groups when he went in which ensured the disaster we now have.
Oh yeah, and to make matters even worse, the Kurds are operating completely independently from the central Iraqi government. They are causing trouble for the Turks and they are negotiating their own oil contracts with foreign companies - to the chagrin of the Iraqi government.
It truly is a mess.
I just love defeatests....not!
Rob says we should have a date for withdrawal. Brilliant strategy, that. Let's tell everyone when we plan on leaving so that they can just sit and wait and then go into Iraq and murder Iraqi citizens by the thousands, then set up camp to continue on with their agression toward the west. What a great plan! Sheesh, Ken, how do these people find you???
I just love this one: "our soldiers are fighting and dying for nothing." Try telling that to their loved ones, Rob! Not everyone is a Cindy Sheehan, thank heaven! Try telling that to the troops that are over there who are seeing real progress being made and are proud of their accomplishments. Try telling that to the civilians who are opening up stores and walking around freely without fear of being blown up! Thank goodness this country has more real patriots in it than we have defeatests like you.
Rob doesn't know what he is talking about. He sounds like a parrot for defeat.
Didn't Investor's Business Daily do a report on how Iraq news has been way down now that we are winning?
Gayle, your name calling does nothing to change the fact that the Iraqi government is a sham.
If you understand anything about why we are supposed to be there, you would know that our soldiers are fighting to prop up the Maliki government and to build up a unity government. That simply will not happen.
You can falsely and offensively accuse Americans of being unpatriotic, you can cry and scream all you want, but by the end of 2008 we will be moving significant numbers of troops out. Not only that, but it will be a bi-partisan, military-backed plan.
The Republicans are in enough trouble already, they are not going to sacrifice more Senate and Congressional seats supporting Bush's non-sensical war.
Your troops are dying so that your draft dodging coward president can prove what a man he is after all and make his oil buddies rich at the same time. He's turned world opinion against America in the most spectacular style post 9/11.
He'd undone 500 years of progress in Christian/Islamic relations in a few short years and now we're on the brink of WWIII which I used to think would start in the middle east and escalate and which I now think will be the middle east vs the rest of the world right from the get go.
You got scared and elected a fool because you fell for the 'America must project strength BS'. Stop meddling in other countries affairs, it doesn't have to be this way and you won't suffer the 'blow-back' effect that 9/11 was.
Liberals are wrong, republicans are wrong, don't fall for the political BS, think for yourselves and for once try to imagine how America is viewed by the rest of the world, see yourselves through our eyes. It might change a few of your views.
Doug --
The "draft-dodger" rhetoric is pure far left bumper sticker piddle and shows just how much you "think for yourself" in your making that reference.
Funny, but it seems that most of Europe has been electing leaders who are pro- U.S., even France.
To what "progress" in Christian-Islamic relations do you refer? Islamic terrorists began their war on us during the Carter Administration and the bulk of their anti-U.S. attacks occurred during the Clinton Administration, in true liberal fashion going unpunished.
It's really tiresome hearing lefties conveniently forget these facts in order to make it sound like we had no problems whatsoever with "The Religion of Peace" until the very minute Bush took office.
For starters, no matter who sits in that office, announcing our withdrawl date to an enemy is NEVER and option. Do you people realy beleive that conservatives want to send our troops into harms way for no reason? We want our troops home as much as anyone else in this nation, but we want them home victorious. Setting a hardline withdrawl date only serves our enemies, no one else.
Would you tell a known burglar when you will be out of town on vacation and no one will be home? Of course not. You don't advertise when you are leaving to those who will wait in the shadows and pounce the second you are gone.
As to the other moron who decided to troll by, what the hell are you talking about? Undone 500 years of Christian/Muslim relations? Do you even understand this enemy? Their own religion dictates that they destroy anyone who will not accept Islam. This is a radical extrimist element of an extremely intollerant religion that has been gaining strenth for the last fifty years. Remember Munich? That was 1972 for God's sake, over thirty years ago. Did young Bush have something to do with that?
Your incredible ignorance of the real world and of this enemy that we face is obvious in your own statements. Even Osama bin Laden has stated that Iraq is al Qaeda's most important fight and that defeat for them there is absolutely unacceptable to them. This single thing should mean that we throw everything we can at them on that front to hand them a swift and complete defeat. Why would we retreat when our very enemy is saying things are going poorly for them and has been forced to try and rally the cause from withering under our offensives?
America must not only project strength, we must use it to destroy those who threaten the world with terrorism. If this fight is that important to al Qaeda, then it should not even be a question for us. Victory is not an option, it is a mandate, made so by the very enemy we face.
Jesus, how can some pleople fail to learn from history and be so dense as to the threats that we face. Willful ignorance and Bush derangement syndrome strike again.
Rob,
The Dems are not going to simply cut off funding - no Congress would ever do that. Rather, they are working to build a bi-partisan, veto-proof majority that agrees on an end date for our major involvement in Iraq. That is the responsible thing to do.
Whoa, Whoa, Rob, that's exactly what they did during Viet Nam, they cut off funding, pulled the plug, and our Troops had to come home no matter how close they were winning that war. It CAN be done!
Marie, the linked story is completely irrelevant. The point of the surge was not to just reduce violence. The point of the surge was to improve security so the Iraqi politicians could come together and resolve their differences. Only then will there be "victory."
You nailed it Rob! So what are you complaining about? That's what I said in my above post. They are winning this war, security is getting better every day, and the Iraqi govt. IS working on thier Country's Laws, Constitution, etc.. and coming together to form thier govt. The Sunni's disarmed and are now working with Shia TOGETHER, they are also working right along American and Iraqi forces.
Infastructure is being repaired, water is being restored, schools are opening again, hospitals are opening again, and there is a steady stream of Iraqi refugees that fled to Jordan and Syria that are returning back to Iraq and back to thier homes.
Not to mention The Iraqi's have a trained Navy now and are getting ready to start transporting oil, something they havent been able to do in years!
And the Iraqi government has offered a US Military Presence in Iraq, they have no problem with us keeping a few bases in Iraq which there should be since there has never been a Country we Liberated and didnt leave at least 1 base at.
Iraq ia a mess? I dont think so!
Doug,
Your troops are dying so that your draft dodging coward president can prove what a man he is after all and make his oil buddies rich at the same time. He's turned world opinion against America in the most spectacular style post 9/11.
Same Old Bush Derangement Syndrome Crap.
NEWSFLASH!! Bush isnt on the ballot dufuss!
And it's you loons who have turned whoever against the war we are winning.
Speaking of World Opinion, Gee, didnt France (Of all people) just elect a pro-American President? Canada? Germany? and some others I have forgotten. Sounds like World Opinion for America has blossomed to me :-)
Oh yeah, speaking of Draft Dodging, where did President Clinton Militarily serve again?
Bush has seen more time in Uniform that Clinton ever has unless he dressed up like a Soldier for Monica!
You have a convoluted view of the future. Iran started this crap back in 1979 when they held our US Embassy Employee's Hostage for 444days. Christian/Islamic relations havent been the same since. Way before President Bush ever entered the Picture. They got considerably worse during the Clinton administration who was to busy with Monica do do anything about anything when Bin Laden declared war on us in 1996 and we were attacked repeatedly afterwards.
You got scared and elected a fool because you fell for the 'America must project strength BS'. Stop meddling in other countries affairs, it doesn't have to be this way and you won't suffer the 'blow-back' effect that 9/11 was.
Are you friggen serious? Do you not remember 9-11? Got Scared? More like got "Pissed" and decided we arent going to take this shit anymore.
A Fool? That fool has kept us safe since 9-11 and it isnt by accident!
If you have a better way to deal with this Terrorist threat (You remember, those that want us all DEAD?), besides withdrawing our Troops at the most unimagineable time, I'd sure like to hear it.
Uh...Who does the World call on for Humanitarian Assistance first, before anyone? The United States Of America. Who does the World call on when they need help in any way? The United States Of America. Dont give me that shit if we stay out of other's people's business, hell they call us for help!
Liberals are wrong, republicans are wrong, don't fall for the political BS, think for yourselves and for once try to imagine how America is viewed by the rest of the world, see yourselves through our eyes. It might change a few of your views.
We think for ourselves and dont get caught up in the Conspiracy theory bullshit you Ron Paul supporters try to shove down our throats.
And it's hard to see through your eyes when your eyes are blind dumbass!!!
Bush has seen more time in Uniform that Clinton ever has unless he dressed up like a Soldier for Monica!
Rofl!
The "draft-dodger" rhetoric is pure far left bumper sticker piddle and shows just how much you "think for yourself" in your making that reference.
Enlisting in the Air National Guard...great way to draft-dodge.
Post a Comment
<< Home