Have They No Sense Of Decency?
In the past few days I've been using words like "projection" when talking about charges by conservatives that Democrats were shamefully politicizing the war in Iraq. Yesterday was the absolute worst kind of exploitation of the Iraq situation for political motives, and there is no doubting who is responsible.
Congressman John Murtha, a Democrat, a Marine of 37 years and decorated Vietnam War veteran who had previously supported the war in Iraq, has had a change of heart. If you want to call it a flip-flop, fine. The fact is that Mr. Murtha sees what is going on and feels that the situation for the troops in Iraq is untenable given the current direction of their mission. So he has proposed that they be re-deployed immediately, given six months for logistical preparation. This is not necessarily the course of action that the majority of Democrats subscribe to (sans timetables and objectives), but Murtha stood up for what he believes is right. And his credentials in supporting the military and the troops are unassailable.
So what do the Republicans do? They order an immediate vote on a ridiculous resolution calling for an "immediate withdrawal" of U.S. troops from Iraq. Not only did this resolution not in any way resemble Murtha's proposal, it also prescribed something that would be physically and logistically impossible. Not surprisingly, the resolution failed 403-3. So what was the point of voting on a resolution that had no chance of passing? The Republicans wanted to see if they could a. divide the Democrats on this resolution, which was a pipe dream (other than the three loonies), or b. claim that both parties are united in staying the course - and maybe bolster public opinion at a time when only 35% approve of the way Bush is handling the war. This is raising the Straw Man to new heights. Do they really think the American people are so dumb to believe that the issue comes down to this false choice of two extremes - stay the current course or pull out right now? If somebody can explain to me how the calling for this vote was anything but shameful politicking on the part of the Republicans, it would be greatly appreciated.
One thing that can be said about Mr. Murtha is that he is now in the good company of other war heroes who have been smeared by the Bush administration and their lackeys in Congress and the media. The words "surrender" and "abandonment" were bandied all about. Rep. Jean Schmidt even resorted to calling Murtha a coward in an indirect, weaselly way. Max Cleland, John Kerry, Paul Hackett and now John Murtha (and bet everything you have that Chuck Hagel will join the list shortly) have all now had their patriotism, commitment to the troops and/or war credentials shat upon by the Right Wing political machine - not to mention what the Bush campaign did to John McCain in South Carolina in 2000. Disgusting. It's a good thing he never ran against Dole or Eisenhower. Then again, his grandfather did all he could to defeat Ike in WWII. Yes, that's a cheap shot, but I'm upset about this. And I'm not sure Americans will be fooled again this time.
posted by Jaymeister at 11/19/2005 10:24:00 p.m.
3 Comments:
Great post Jay. I agree completely.
And these days, I think many Americans are seeing through their "war President."
How exactly has he been "smeared" by President Bush or Vice President Cheney? I agree that Rep Schmidt was out of line to quote from that e-mail; but so are many of the leading Democratic Senators who constantly use words like "misled", "lied", "incompetent". How are those accusations any worse than "cowardly" and "traitorous"? It's all inflammatory rhetoric.
Go look up what President Bush said in response to the criticism leveled at Senator Murtha. President Bush's tone and language is very moderate and respectful in comparison to the harpie-like shrieks coming from the Left.
MSM headlines immediately after Senator Murtha's statements left his message completely clear as a bell: "Immediate withdrawal" was the interpretation. And people on the Left were celebrating his open attack. But as soon as Republicans challenged those engaging in demagoguery for troop pullout to put their money where their mouth is, and show the American public where they really stand, all of a sudden it's, "no, no, no...that's not what Senator Murtha meant! You right-wingers are twisting his words around!"
I thought it was a brilliant political manuever on the part of Republicans. But of course, this gets reported as "Republicans lashing out" when they defend against their critics; it's a "cheap Republican political stunt" when they made Democrats look foolish by confronting them with an immediate vote; yet when Senator Reid shuts down the Senate for a closed-door session, that's regarded as a brilliant political move when there was no earthly good reason for it other than showboating. Unbelieveable!
Senator Murtha's war service is to be honored, as is his opinions, perspective, and contributions to the debate. Now...let's see someone on the Left take what I just stated and twist it around to say, I'm "attacking Senator Murtha's patriotism...." I'm "calling him a coward!"
Go look up what President Bush said in response to the criticism leveled at Senator Murtha.
You know as well as I do that presidents have plenty of people to do their roughhousing for them. Bush was also respectful of Kerry's service while his shills helped push the Swifties.
MSM headlines immediately after Senator Murtha's statements left his message completely clear as a bell: "Immediate withdrawal" was the interpretation.
The MSM got it wrong. Nothing unusual about that. (Sorry Mustard.)
And people on the Left were celebrating his open attack.
Most were celebrating the fact that Murtha had his eyes opened to what was going on and had the courage of his convictions, but were far from unanimous regarding his remedy.
made Democrats look foolish by confronting them with an immediate vote
A vote on something that the Democrats had not advocated. Why don't they have an up or down vote on something the Dems actually do ask for? They can't even get committee hearings on those.
all of a sudden it's, "no, no, no...that's not what Senator Murtha meant!
Because it wasn't what Murtha meant. That would be like voting on a resolution that saidn, "We resolve to keep our current troop level and tactical strategy in Iraq forever, regardless of whether progress is achieved or not." It was just as extreme. If the Republicans were really serious about everyone laying their cards on the table, why didn't they let the Dems write the resolution to be voted on?
Post a Comment
<< Home