Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Confessions of a 'Defeatocrat'
The Washington Post ^ | October 15, 2006 | John P. Murtha

Posted on 10/15/2006 1:08:48 AM PDT by John Carey

The Republicans are running scared. In the White House, on Capitol Hill and on the campaign trail, they're worried about losing control of Congress. And so the administration and the GOP have launched a desperate assault on Democrats and our position on the war in Iraq. Defeatists, they call us, and appeasers and -- oh so cleverly -- "Defeatocrats."

Vice President Cheney has accused Democrats of "self-defeating pessimism." Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has faulted us for believing that "vicious extremists can be appeased." The White House calls Democrats the party of "cut and run."

It's all baseless name-calling, and it's all wrong. Unless, of course, being a Defeatocrat means taking a good hard look at the administration's Iraq policy and determining that it's a failure.

In that case, count me in. Because Democrats recognize that we're headed for a far greater disaster in Iraq if we don't change course -- and soon. This is not defeatism. This is realism.

Our troops who are putting their lives on the line deserve a plan that matches our military prowess with diplomatic and political skill. They deserve a clear and achievable mission and they deserve to know precisely what it will take to accomplish it. They deserve answers, not spin.

Our military has done all it can do in Iraq, and the Iraqis want their occupation to end. I support bringing our troops home at the earliest practicable date, at a rate that will keep those remaining there safe on the ground. It's time that the White House and the GOP start working with Democrats in Congress to come up with a reasonable timetable for withdrawal and for handing the Iraqi government over to the Iraqis.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; US: District of Columbia; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: enemywithin; iraq; murtha; subversives

1 posted on 10/15/2006 1:08:48 AM PDT by John Carey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: John Carey
"In that case, count me in. Because Democrats recognize that we're headed for a far greater disaster in Iraq if we don't change course -- and soon."

Yep, that's what all the Democrat scumbags say: "Change course." "Bush is wrong on Iraq." Etc. Etc.

Never ONCE have I heard any SPECIFIC proposals from the Democrats on what they would do differently in Iraq and what SPECIFIC results they would expect from their proposals. All they have are meaningless soundbites like "change course".

2 posted on 10/15/2006 1:19:57 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Carey

100 + years later, and it is the same old story from the same treasonous party:



"The Peace Democrats were opposed to the war and would have accepted a negotiated peace resulting in an independent Confederacy. Most Peace Democrats were from the midwestern states of Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana, but political dissent was widespread throughout the North. Midwesterners had close economic and sentimental ties with the South, and many of them bitterly opposed the Union's war against what one of them called "the injured, incensed, downtrodden people of the South."

In 1861, Republicans started calling antiwar Democrats "copperheads", likening them to the poisonous snake. By 1863, the Peace Democrats had accepted the label, but for them the copper "head" was the likeness of Liberty on the copper penny, and they proudly wore pennies as badges.

The Copperheads mounted a forceful and sustained protest against the Lincoln administration's policies and conduct. The most popular of the Copperheads was Democratic Congressman Clement L. Vallandigham, who in 1862 introduced a bill in Congress to imprison the President. Instead, Vallandigham and a host of other Democrats, including judges, newspaper editors, politicians, and antiwar activists, were arrested and imprisoned without trial on the orders of Lincoln and Secretary of War Stanton, who had decided to take off their gloves in dealing with persons "guilty of any disloyal practice".

Fascinating Fact: At the 1864 Democratic convention, Vallandigham persuaded the party to adopt a platform that declared the war a failure and called for negotiations with the Confederacy. "

http://civilwar.bluegrass.net/HomeFront/copperheads.html


3 posted on 10/15/2006 1:20:32 AM PDT by Henry Wilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henry Wilson
Instead, Vallandigham and a host of other Democrats, including judges, newspaper editors, politicians, and antiwar activists, were arrested and imprisoned without trial on the orders of Lincoln and Secretary of War Stanton, who had decided to take off their gloves in dealing with persons "guilty of any disloyal practice".

Its about time we took a page from our history.

4 posted on 10/15/2006 1:40:20 AM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: John Carey
Defeatocrat seems to imply that at one time they stood in support of America in the War on Terror, which looking at the facts makes it quite clear that this isn't true. I've been calling them Traitorcrats because of their endless opposition to giving the administration the tools it needs to win the war. They hamstring us abroad with their cut-and-ruin rhetoric and thus embolden our enemies and cause more troop deaths, they harm us at home opposing warrantless wiretaps on suspected terrorists and calling for terrorists bastards captured abroad in a time of war to be afforded more civil liberties than they would have had in the countries they were captured in.
5 posted on 10/15/2006 1:42:12 AM PDT by Hexenhammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: June K.

Ping


6 posted on 10/15/2006 1:42:53 AM PDT by Mr_Moonlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Yep, that's what all the Democrat scumbags say: "Change course." "Bush is wrong on Iraq." Etc. Etc. Never ONCE have I heard any SPECIFIC proposals from the Democrats on what they would do differently in Iraq and what SPECIFIC results they would expect from their proposals. All they have are meaningless soundbites like "change course".

The implication is that if the White House and the GOP are dumb and wrong, the Democrats and Murtha must be right and smart simply by virtue of their disagreement. This is lazy thinking at its worst.

Joe Biden is the only Democrat that has outlined a specific strategy, and it involves subdividing Iraq into three ethnically-dominated sectors -- Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish. This supposedly would end sectarian violence, but the stickier and more important question of how to share oil money to the satisfaction of all when the majority of the crude comes from the persecuted Kurdistan region goes unanswered.

7 posted on 10/15/2006 1:44:25 AM PDT by L.N. Smithee (Normal people would kill to save their kids. Muslim fascists raise their kids to die killing others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

"Never ONCE have I heard any SPECIFIC proposals from the Democrats on what they would do differently in Iraq and what SPECIFIC results they would expect from their proposals. All they have are meaningless soundbites like "change course".

Nor does the DBM ask that question!! Just continues to give stories like this coverage.

Same story posted earlier under a different name and source...

"chron.com"
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/4260012.html
Rep. Murtha blasts GOP for name-calling

© 2006 The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Rep. John Murtha, a decorated Marine veteran who favors withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, wrote an essay for Sunday's Washington Post blasting Republicans for referring to him and other Iraq war opponents as "Defeatocrats."

Frankly, between a Democrats .....or a Defeatocrats .... I think the later fits perfectly!!!




8 posted on 10/15/2006 1:51:54 AM PDT by malia (President Bush - a man of honor!! clinton as President a man of horror)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Carey

Well where Murthafurka is concerned, the correct term is Faggocrat....which I took pleasure in calling him


9 posted on 10/15/2006 1:57:18 AM PDT by Armigerous ( Non permitte illegitimi te carborundum- "Don't let the bastards grind you down")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: malia

oops - sorry
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1719617/posts

Rep. Murtha blasts GOP for name-calling


10 posted on 10/15/2006 2:16:44 AM PDT by malia (President Bush - a man of honor!! clinton as President a man of horror)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: John Carey
Morning John. Murtha is at it again huh? Well, let's take a look.

some were not convinced that Iraq was accelerating the development of nuclear weapons and had an active chemical and biological weapons program; and almost all believed that Iraq was not involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Wasn't their cry that Iraq had no wmds at all and no ties to terrorism or al-quaeda at all? Is it me or has their war cry shifted on that issue again?

Was Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, former Army chief of staff, a defeatist when he said that it would take several hundred thousand troops to prevail in Iraq

And then;

I support bringing our troops home at the earliest practicable date

We don't have enough troops there so even less would be the answer. Thanks for that little gem.

Democrats also identified shortfalls in body armor, armored vehicles and electronic jammers to defeat roadside bombs. Democrats uncovered problems with the military readiness of our ground forces in the United States and fought for measures to restore it. That's hardly defeatist.

Nice try murtha but the only measure you put forth to increase the readiness of troops in the U.S. is to pull out of Iraq.

Well Senator, I gave you a chance, I read the entire column that the post provided you and all you have is defeatism. Not one idea to improve the situation. Not one sentence that could be constrewed as constructive criticism. You have offered nothing of value to the discussion. You have just fully reinforced Roves assertion that you are nothing but a Defeatocrat.

11 posted on 10/15/2006 2:18:29 AM PDT by bad company ([link:www.truthout.org/docs_2006/083006J.shtml | The Path to 9/11])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Carey
The Republicans main campaign theme from now to the election should be "the Democrats either don't have any ideas, or if they do, they don't want to tell you, because they know its not what you want, and you would reject them at the polls."

Defeatocrats, I like it!
12 posted on 10/15/2006 2:29:13 AM PDT by HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath (Psalm 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

"Never ONCE have I heard any SPECIFIC proposals from the Democrats on what they would do differently in Iraq and what SPECIFIC results they would expect from their proposals."

You heard it. The RATS want to retreat to Okinawa.


13 posted on 10/15/2006 3:59:33 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Murtha is even cutting and running from a debate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Carey

Diana Irey BUMP!


14 posted on 10/15/2006 4:13:25 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Carey
In that case, count me in. Because Democrats recognize that we're headed for a far greater disaster in Iraq if we don't change course -- and soon. This is not defeatism. This is realism.

Translation: "If we don't change course, we'll have enough success in Iraq on a regular basis that Republicans will keep getting elected over and over again - that's a disaster of epic proportions."

15 posted on 10/15/2006 4:13:37 AM PDT by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Carey
"Most Democrats voted against the 2002 resolution authorizing the use of military force in Iraq. Regrettably, I was not one of them."

Another Murtha lie? Most RATS voted against the use of force?
16 posted on 10/15/2006 5:32:47 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Demonrats want the Gays out of Congress.....stand back and let them purge their base.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight
MM- Thanks for directing me to this.

Of course, there are no surprises here.

...I can't see that leaving in the middle of a job is the answer! All the lives lost would have been in vain.

If the Dems get in, that's exactly what will happen.

...Do they think that the world then will automatically be a peaceful place...that all we need to do is close our eyes to the threat of terrorism and it will cease to exist?

J.
17 posted on 10/15/2006 7:28:10 AM PDT by June K.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Never ONCE have I heard any SPECIFIC proposals from the Democrats on what they would do differently in Iraq and what SPECIFIC results they would expect from their proposals. All they have are meaningless soundbites like "change course".

The SPECIFIC plans are to put into practice the Terrorist Bill of Rights and cut military funding in Iraq; fire the generals and bring on the Pampered Princes like pretty boy Wesley Clark, who may be another Mark Foley........and mind you, let the United Nations take over - take? You Bet.

Murtha IS the enemy.

VOTE REPUBLICAN IF YOU WANT FREEDOM FROM TERRORISM

18 posted on 10/15/2006 7:48:44 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Carey; Lancey Howard; Henry Wilson; All
Forget Murtha. Here's what the Pentagon admitted as of June 27, 2005.

"Casey said the level of attacks -- between 450 and 500 a week -- is roughly the same as it was a year ago. There were times when the level was between 800 and 900 attacks per week. The area of the attacks is also pretty confined. In 14 out of the 18 provinces in the country, there are only about three attacks a day."

For your consideration:

The Terror War Is An Honor War

Bring Them Freedom, Or They Destroy Us

Waging War, One Police Precinct at a Time

19 posted on 10/15/2006 12:26:30 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Carey

Saddam agrees


20 posted on 10/15/2006 12:56:27 PM PDT by bnelson44 (Proud parent of a tanker! (Charlie Mike, son))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Carey
This is not defeatism. This is realism.

It's real defeatism.

21 posted on 10/15/2006 12:59:38 PM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; All

Well .. here ya go! Everybody listen up!!:

Charlie Rangel - who will be chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee (the people who hold the purse strings), has publically stated "I WILL DEFUND THE WAR".

We all know what that means. Another Vietnam. They will pull the purse strings and place the item in a necessary bill - and then dare the President to veto it.

So .. THEY DO HAVE A PLAN - THE PLAN IS TO "CUT AND RUN"; destablize the middle east (blaming Bush), bring our troops home - refuse to pay for their medical needs - stop giving them GI college funds - demoralize them - call them baby killers .. WHAT ELSE IS NEW!!

Go ahead you - "let's punish the repubs idiots" (and you know who you are) - you are going to totally destroy our military. I hope you can live with that!


22 posted on 10/15/2006 1:03:37 PM PDT by CyberAnt (Drive-By Media: Fake news, fake documents, fake polls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bad company
Well Senator,

Ooops, you meant to say Congressman, although I'm sure he wants to be a Senator some day.

23 posted on 10/15/2006 1:06:23 PM PDT by webheart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: webheart
How's this for a couple of Defeatorepubbie Senators?
24 posted on 10/15/2006 1:09:51 PM PDT by SierraWasp (To be fair, Bill Clinton did more than any other President to protect us from the Branch Davidians!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: John Carey
Well.

Murtha appears to be the leader of the defeatocrats.
25 posted on 10/15/2006 1:11:51 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
You are correct the Dems to have a strategy and a plan for Iraq. They want to reuse the Vietnam template from 1969 to 1975. First gain control or as then keep control of the House where all money bills most originate. When enough momentum can be generated by the following actions begin pushing defunding actions for both the GWOT and Iraq.Second relentlessly criticize all administration actions on the GWOT and Iraq but be careful not to offer any real alternatives. The goal is to get the administration into a debate with itself and then move to exploit the usual opportunistic fissures this will cause. Eventually a small but loud mouthed Repub minority such as Chafee from RI will make common cause with the Rats and be used relentlessly to beat the Prez. Constantly harp on purported American misdeeds or blunders to sow defeatism and understate or deny any negative consequences of a precipitate US exit. Denigrate native supporters of the US in Iraq or Afghanistan as 'war lords', 'corrupt', 'drug traffickers, or 'incompetents' who it is inferred are hopeless or unworthy of US support and American deaths. Use the war as a tool to gain domestic political power and try to topple the administration through criminalizing the actions of major administration members. Impeachment of the SECDEF would be an example of this sort of thing. Actively assist in undermining US military operations through budgetary and legalistic constraints. The goal is a humiliating public defeat or rout such as the fall of Saigon redux. Immediately start yelling 'no recriminations' as the wave of Islamacist chaos rolls through the Mideast and deny that the enemies of the US are running amok around the world or that if they are dismiss it as internal 'unrest' and deny any importance. When a nuclear device is set off in the US hasten to blame the Repubs and Bush.
26 posted on 10/15/2006 3:09:09 PM PDT by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

That's a change in course I could live with.


27 posted on 10/15/2006 3:55:09 PM PDT by freema (Marine FRiend, 1stCuz2xRemoved, Mom, Aunt, Sister, Friend, Wife, Daughter, Niece)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

By jove I think you've got it!!


28 posted on 10/15/2006 10:37:39 PM PDT by CyberAnt (Drive-By Media: Fake news, fake documents, fake polls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson