Defeat
Posted at 3:44pm on Apr. 9, 2008 It Is Hard And Complex
The "real" issues at hand in the Iraq conundrum.
By haystack
General Petraeus testified before the Senate yesterday. Ambassador Crocker testified as well. The major headlines seemed more interested in the Presidential nominees and how they, in turn, handled their couple of minutes before the cameras questioning these two men about the status of things in Iraq. Much excitement swirled among the major media outlets, opining about how "Commander in Chiefish" they might have performed. Little was offered on the "specifics" of the news that the General and Ambassador's testimony brought us about the single most divisive issue in modern American history...well, since Viet Nam at least.
I watched it all on CSPAN 2, but since I don't get CSPAN 3 I missed the Foreign Relations circus in the afternoon. I was lucky though because Obama's network - CNN - promised all afternoon they would interrupt ANYONE that might be discussing the day's news when Obama got HIS turn to demagogue. They did, he did, and I remain unimpressed.
This is about Iraq. It's about Afghanistan. It's about the Middle East. It's about terrorism and the long war. It's about Sunni and Shia and Wahabi. It's about Christians and Jews and Muslims. It's about oil. It's about our middle and long-term security interests. It's about our grandchildren and the grandchildren of Arabs and Persians and Israelis. It's about everyone else's grandchildren as well. It's about things that are hard and complicated. Increasingly, however, it's becoming MORE about making it go away by turning our backs on these issues hoping they'll get better on their own (some even believing they will ONLY get better by turning our backs on them); hard and complicated don't go very well in modern America anymore.
It should NOT be about who the next President is. Clearly, however, I am in the minority in this regard.
America still stands at the very same crossroad it has been made to suffer for a very tiresomely long time now: do we stay or do we go?
This is going to be a long one, so if you leave now, leave with something my good friend Jeff Emanuel said...WAY back in October of 2007:
While a long-term view of Iraq, and its future issues, must be considered (with far more care than the nation’s future was thought through at the time of the initial invasion), those tasked with making tactical, strategic, and policy-level decisions on Iraq must not lose sight of the now in favor of analyzing every possible future issue. The decision-making process must not fall victim to the paralysis that can be brought on by over-analysis of future possibilities, lest America’s current effort be inadvertently and fatally undermined.
It's stunning what you might learn should you JOIN the men and women doing the heavy lifting as opposed to jumping in for a quick photo-op and running home for another dull day on Capitol Hill.
More below the fold...
Posted in Anti-War crowd | Defeat | Iraq | Surrender | the long war | War — Comments (26)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 6:08pm on Jan. 23, 2008 Democrats: Political Eunuchs On The Iraq War
By haystack
So says CQ's John M. Donnelly [subscription] anyway. Apparently, given their complete failure to force President Bush into a precipitous withdrawal and surrender, the Democrats have taken beating after beating from their kook fringe wing nuts and find themselves now in search of a new way to "frame" this "Iraq business" in a way they hope will garner votes and campaign donations in time for November.
Chastened by their failure to change President Bush’s Iraq War policies last year, anti-war Democrats are pondering a shift in their strategy.
Many Democrats expect a concentration on measures that would limit Bush’s war policies, rather than demand troop withdrawals, and fewer votes overall on the war this election year. In addition to guaranteeing a congressional role in any U.S.-Iraq security accord, these policy targets range from tightening controls over private contractors to ensuring minimum amount of rest and readiness for deploying troops, ideas that also were debated last year and drew some Republican support.
"I don’t think the passion of any of us who are against the war has decreased at all," said Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, a leader among anti-war Democrats in the House.
But he added that many Democrats were now trying "to get behind what we think can be passed. . . . Those of us who want this war to end are interested in concrete votes vs. engaging in votes just for the sake of therapy. It’s not the quantity, it’s the quality I’m interested in."
I have a suggested means of therapy, though I doubt any of these clowns would heed my call...but I digress...
You know, there's a striking parallel between this Congress and the Parliament in Iraq the Democrats are so wont to vilify. Poor legislation after poor legislation. Failed vote after failed vote. Failed compromise after failed compromise. Failed progress after failed progress. Disappointed constituencies and unbearable stalemate and bitter partisanship. I wonder...if we swapped them out, legislator for legislator, would we notice any difference? My bet is yes-at least the Iraqis are suffering fits and starts over trying to BUILD a country rather than trying to tear one apart.
The Democrats insist their threats to abandon support of the Iraqi Government has been the cause, moreso than the surge, of political progress there. If that is to become the proven mechanism for improving the performance of a stalled Government, perhaps such a technique might be considered here in the good ole U S of A...savvy? Well, it was a thought at least.
More fun and frivolity below the fold...
Posted in Defeat | Democrats | Iraq | power grab | retreats — Comments (36)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 4:55pm on Jan. 23, 2008 The Senate GOP Leadership Embraces the Minority
By Erick
The Senate GOP has been having its retreat. This is the first retreat since Lamar Alexander (R-TN) was named Chairman of the Conference. In this position, Alexander is charged with developing the GOP agenda and controlling the message.
Today, the Republican Senators are at a retreat and they are getting their first taste of Lamar Alexander's leadership. His message: embrace being in the minority.
According to Senate staff familiar with the conversations, Senators have been hearing from multiple pollsters including Dave Winston. Winston has consistently been presenting polling to the GOP caucus over the last year that has shown that the war, spending, and corruption were three major issues leading to GOP defeat. You can get a sense of Winston's thinking here.
“What you’re seeing is a greater awareness of earmarks,” said David Winston, a GOP pollster who has done work for congressional Republicans on the issue. “As a result, people have been concerned about waste in government and now view earmarks in conflict with accountability.”
As if orchestrated, other "experts" who were invited by Republican leadership gave reports downplaying the GOP's struggle with spending and pork and focusing mainly on the war in Iraq as the problem. Senators were told that what the American people want most is cooperation in Congress and to see lawmakers get things done: Read -- Pass Democrat legislation. In fact, by the time it was over, I'm told you would have thought the Appropriators themselves had arranged the presentation to completely undermine Winston's assertion that waste and earmarks had anything at all to do with the GOP loss in 2006.
Lamar Alexander's central theme of the day now is that the GOP must work with the Democrats on "bipartisan legislation" to show the American people the Senate can get things done. Whoa unto the Republican Senator who obstructs the will of the majority.
Read on . . .
Posted in Capitulation | Defeat | Democrat-Lite | Republicans | Surrender — Comments (27)/ Email this page » / Read More »
