Posted on 04/03/2007 7:09:14 AM PDT by Kaslin
The way I see it, politically speaking, Democrats better hope we don't withdraw our troops from Iraq before the 2008 presidential and congressional elections.
Not only would they be damaged by the inevitably catastrophic consequences our premature withdrawal would cause, but voters would also begin to see their obstruction in the prosecution of the war is not limited to Iraq.
Think about it.
Right now they are basking in every bit of bad news the mainstream media selectively ensures comes out of Iraq, and they are daily ratcheting up the pressure on President Bush to set "benchmarks" and "timetables." Given the war's apparent unpopularity, Democrats can't help but profit in the short term as they appear to be advocating a position that aligns them with the majority of Americans.
Indeed, the more they hear themselves rant, the more emboldened they become toward extremism and to attempt legislation outside their constitutional authority.
A telltale sign of their increasing cockiness is their announcement that they are about to introduce a bill to cut funding for the Iraq war. Up until now, they've lacked the courage to go that far and have just danced around the issue. But just off the presses, we read that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Russ Feingold are co-sponsoring a bill that will "bring our involvement in the Iraq war to an end."
The relevant part of the bill states: (c) Prohibition on Use of Funds — No funds appropriated or otherwise made available under any provision of law may be obligated or expended to continue the deployment in Iraq of members of the United States Armed Forces after March 31, 2008."
Be aware that as recently as Nov. 30, 2006, Sen. Reid said something quite different. He said, "We're not going to do anything to limit funding or cut off funds."
What has changed since then that would warrant such an about face?
How about the fact that the troop surge is showing signs of success? No, that would cut the other way now, wouldn't it? More likely it's the increasing pressure from the antiwar base and the reportedly solid poll numbers against the war. But, as I said, the Democrats better be wary of what they wish for.
If we do end our significant military involvement in Iraq before the Iraqi forces can protect themselves and their new government as a result of Democratic pressure, Democrats will have to answer for the mayhem and instability that will ensue.
Even if we have relatively secured the situation there enough to withdraw before the 2008 election, which is doubtful, it's unlikely that Democrats will benefit politically from that development
An end to the Iraq war will not end the war on terror, as much as many liberals appear to believe otherwise, since they think the war is but a figment of our neoconservative paranoid imagination. With our withdrawal from Iraq, the nation will once again have an opportunity to focus on the Democrats' policies on the war, which have been obscured by the enormous elephant in the room: Iraq.
It will not be a pretty or comforting sight.
Without the aid and comfort of an unpopular war (Iraq), voters, assuming Republicans can sharpen their communication skills, will be reminded of the Democrats' sympathy for the enemy's position on a far-ranging array of issues related to the war on terror.
While the Democrats have been able to pass off their obstructionism in the war on terror as their opposition solely to the Iraq war, the public will soon see it goes way beyond that.
There will be nothing to shield their knee-jerk sympathy for the constitutional civil rights and access to civilian courts of enemy combatant prisoners in Gitmo and elsewhere, their frantic demands that we close Gitmo, their exaggeration of the supposedly freedom-swallowing provisions of the Patriot Act, their outrage at our highly effective NSA terrorist-monitoring program, their defamation of our soldiers as torturers, the proposed unionization of airport security workers, their appeasement orientation toward Iran, their willingness to subordinate decisions concerning our national security to the United Nations and their overall desire — by all indications — that we reorient our approach to terrorists away from war and toward law enforcement, as in the glory days of the Clinton presidency.
Let's see how they fare in these debates if they get what they wish for on Iraq
THAT is how you know withdrawal timetables are a bad idea.
- posted on 03/26/2007 7:09:52 AM CDT by RayStacy
They’ve made CNN reporter Michael Ware the expert on Iraq. That probably is a sign of desperation. Or stupidity.
So unless they are starting to be beheaded the al-Qaeda friendly press will continue to give aid and comfort to the enemy as will the Senate and House.
“Democrats Desperate for Bad News”
Democrats and the Media thrive on giving us bad news. They make us feel bad about ourselves and with our guilt, they take from us so we can feel better.
And this is how we beat the RATS. Have a nationwide good news campaign. Force the left to deny there is good news. This should come from grassroots campaigns.
Make the RATS spend money on telling us there is bad news. That is how we will bankrupt them and beat them.
What David Limbaugh is missing is that the Dims believe that if they are successful in engineering a defeat in Iraq, it will only be Bush’s loss and not the USA’s loss.
The Democrats don’t care if we lose because only care about whether or not they get blamed for the loss. The consequences for the county are irrelevant to them.
That is why we can not allow them to be successful in engineering a defeat in Iraq and the WOT on the whole
“We’re not going to do anything to limit funding or cut off funds.”
Democrats lie...
It’s what they do.
And thier willing allies in the leftist MSM let them get by with it, time, after time, after time.
NO ONE other than a few guys on Fox are willing to call them on it, because to do so means the end of thier carreer. Goebbells would have been proud.
It is the liberals and the Anti war crowds; who encourage the terrorists, who are to blame our troops still have to be in Iraq. And the cost is so high.
As I have already ordered burquas for all of my family members, I will share with you the way to win the WH in ‘08. President Bush should immediately withdraw all American troops from every single country and tell the global community they are on their own. Bye. So long. Your problem - you deal with it. Let chaos reign.
/s (kinda sorta)
Both
The MSM/DNC will make sure that Rebups & President is to blame... not the libs. Unless America wakes up - we are in trouble big time.
They own defeat.
Limbaugh is forgetting something....History!
The liberals got away clean after engineering the US defeat in Vietnam. Millions of deaths were just overlooked. Why in the world would anyone expect it to be any different this time? Many of the left’s Vietnam Hall-of-Famers are considered heroes today. Kerry darn near became president!
Throughout history, people have thought events were too horrible to happen and the world would come to the rescue, only to find reality is a different animal.
No — this time is different because of the internet!! News travels fast and with the 24 hour news going on daily, we know what happens faster. I believe the Dims do register defeat and negativity constantly...trying to get the MSM to register nothing positive for America. They haven’t talked about any good in Iraq since the war started. It will come home to them....sooner or later.
“No — this time is different because of the internet!!”
The internet allows for a MUCH better informed opposition, but the vast majority of the sheeple still get thier news from the Alphabet networks, in 3 second bites on the way to work, or in the 30 second news brief before thier favorite TV show.
In this environment, SOUNDBITES and HYPERBOLE sell far better than any breathy explanation of facts.
Easily shouted 3-5 word slogans like, “Bush Lied!!” or “ILLEGAL WAR FOR OIL!!”, are repeated time and time again, EVERYWHERE the sheeple look, every hour, of every day.
After a while, the propoganda begins to have an effect..
I work at a military facility and CNN is on every TV. I watched the news spot of McCain touring Iraq and wondered why the reps would allow this boondoggle to be the “State of Iraq” story of the day.
If you saw it it was McCain (fully vested with bullet proof gear)overhead apaches, and heavy armor with other reps touring a city street in Iraq with a huge amount of security personnel in tow. The point is we need to show the safe areas of Iraq. Not some bubble that the troops secure and open up for the purpose of a tour.
The MSM does not even have to try to show the negative points here when they did it for them by putting so much information between the lines. Does anyone have a map showing the areas that are “normal” in Iraq? We need one.
When will the republicans find a backbone and take a stand against the treasonous democrats? Either the republicans are spineless or the democrats have damning evidence that could send some republicans to jail. It keeps getting more disgusting with everyday that passes.
Give them a Pelosi story.
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.