An article in the Washington Post this morning reports the fears of some Democrats that voters will interpret the anti-war comments of DNC chief Howard Dean and minority leader Nancy Pelosi as meaning, well, that the Democrats oppose the war.
This fear assumes that voters believe that Democrats believe what they say and say what they believe, which this article suggests may be an increasingly dubious proposition:
- Howard Dean said recently that “the idea that we’re going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong.” Deans Dem critics say “that comment could reinforce popular perceptions that the party is weak on military matters….” But insofar as Dean speaks for the party, are those “popular perceptions” wrong?
- Nancy Pelosi has recently endorsed Murtha’s proposal for “within six months,” and she claims that “more than half of House Democrats support her position….” Dem critics say this position, and Dean’s can’t-win statement, “suggest[s] Democrats are the party of a quick pullout….”
- Suggests? Well, if the “suggestion” is wrong, what are the Democrats the party of?
“What I want Democrats to be discussing is what the president’s policies have led to,” [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm] Emanuel said. He added that once discussion turns to a formal timeline for troop withdrawals, “the how and when gets buried” and many voters take away only an impression that Democrats favor retreat.
I wonder why anyone would think that. Surely all informed observers know that Democrats don’t favor “retreat”; they favor “redeployment” outside Iraq, preferably far outside. Emanuel wants Democrats to limit their comments to history, and avoid saying what they would do, to, as the WaPo article put it, “fix public attention mostly on Bush’s policies rather the details of a Democratic alternative.”
- Continuing the Kerry tradition of being both for and against the same thing,
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said that while Pelosi estimates more than half of House Democrats favor a speedy withdrawal, she will lobby members in today’s meeting against adopting this as a caucus position.
In other words, Pelosi doesn’t want the caucus to go on record supporting what she claims a majority of the caucus supports. She’s afraid, I guess, that going on record in favor of “a speedy withdrawal” might “suggest” to impressionable voters that Democrats favor “a speedy withdrawal.”
- “DNC spokeswoman Karen Finney said Dean’s comments were taken out of context. Dean, she said, meant the war was unwinnable unless the Bush administration adopts a new strategy.” Neither Dean nor Finney nor Emanuel have said, however, what that “new strategy” should be, and if Emanuel has his way they never will.
It seems to me that it’s not clear whether the biggest problem facing the Democrats today is that they don’t have a strategy for Iraq, or that they do and they’re worried voters will find out what it is.
UPDATE [7 Dec.]
See also the excellent discussion of this article on JustOneMinute.
UPDATE II [7 Dec.]
From an editorial in the New York Daily News:
To paraphrase Mark Twain: Suppose you’re an imbecile. Now suppose you’re Howard Dean. Oops, I repeat myself.
….
One more thing: He says his cut-and-run plan is a “strategic redeployment,” not a withdrawal.
And he has the nerve to call Bush a liar.
The Dems
The Democrats are the party of defeatism, since they have swallowed whole the ideology of radical feminism… masculinity is evil.
Thus, all the characterists of masculinity must be reversed or defeated. One strange camp of the left even denounces victory as an outmoded and evil concept.
Imperialism and colonialism are, Democrats now believe, unquestionable evils. Yet, the world has almost always functioned through imperialism and colonialism, and all efforts to change that have resulted in something far worse.
The left wing of the party has entirely disavowed the notion that one should root for the home team… simple because it is the home team. They imagine themselves to be too sophisticated for that.
In short, the Democratic Party is in thrall to nutjobs, and unable to discard the poison of Utopian idealism. It’s a farce. As a result, no sensible opposition party exists in the arena of foreign policy.
el blogero writes:
>>>”Oh, and if America retreats, Democrats will just blame Bush for losing the war, even if all he does is follow exactly what they are recommending (which is to surrender and retreat).”
John writes:
>>>”It seems to me that it’s not clear whether the biggest problem facing the Democrats today is that they don’t have a strategy for Iraq, or that they do and they’re worried voters will find out what it is.”
It seems to me that those who will look past BUSH’S STRATEGY in Iraq, which has resulted in 2,129 dead US Servicemen and women (as of my typing this), over 18,000 wounded, nearly 49,000 evacuated from theatre, and anywhere from 30,000-100,000+ DEAD Iraqis (incalcuable wounded) at costs so far of nearly $300,000,000,000 to form a dysfunctional Islamic Republic dominated by the fundamentalist Iran Shiite Mullahs while destroying our volunteer Army and Reserves…
…and claim that DEMOCRATS, the party NOT in control of any branch of the federal government somehow has the PROBLEM…well…then I would say that they have no problem with MORE death, MORE casualties, MORE debt, and MORE radical Islamic Fundamentalism, because that is what all evidence shows staying on Bush’s current course will bring.
Of course the Democrats have different ideas and views on this disaster. Democrats don’t have “hit men” like Karl Rove and right winged media flacks ready to bury Republican politicians who DARE speak off of the script about the President’s policies.
I’m a Democrat, I’m glad I don’t belong to a political party that rubber stamps Presidential decisions, or is in lock-step blind obediance to the White House.
–Cobra
Cobra: >
I suppose lock-step blind obedience to the Angry left is more comforting.
I can only hope that Dems continue their “surrender and retreat” strategy. It must be interesting to be part of a party that can only know success if America is defeated. If it’s any consolation, there are plenty of people currently residing in caves in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq who share the same wish.
You Can Think It, But You Can’t Say It
“Dean’s take on Iraq makes even less sense than the scream in Iowa: Both are uninformed and unhelpful”. Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.) is very harsh, but according to the Washington Post, he is not the only Democrat to fear that his leaders’ rhetorical bl…
El blogero writes:
>>>”If it’s any consolation, there are plenty of people currently residing in caves in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq who share the same wish.”
No, you’re being like nearly every other war supporter who thinks that attacking liberals and democrats is the key to some victory.
“Democrats” aren’t planting roadside bombs and I.E.Ds that are blowing the hell out of our servicefolks.
“Democrats” aren’t laying mortar rounds and sniper fire on our troops.
“Democrats” aren’t putting own suicide bomber vests and loading up trucks with explosives in kamikaze raids on Iraqi security forces.
“Democrats” aren’t forming Islamic fundamentalist death squads and militias in the Shia dominated southern portion of Iraq, or holding rallies for SADDAM HUSSEIN in Sunni cities.
But you just keep on believing that your REAL enemy is your fellow American.
–Cobra
Cobra, listing casualties and costs doesn’t really mean anything.
Would you have argued against the U.S. entry in the European front of WWII because of casualties and costs? They were astronomically higher.
I’m going to tell you once again… you are on the wrong side. The left only temporarily cozies up to black men for the sake of delivering a kick in the shins to hetero white men. The ultimate goal is the sissification of all men. You won’t much care for the world that the left envisions for the future. It is a world of wimps, passivity, dull security… ultimate unimagineable boredom.
Democrats have all the resources Republicans have, and they’ve got mean guys working for them too. Where in the world do you get the idea that this is not the case? I used to work for the richest corporate law firm in the world. Partners there made $10 million a year… in 1996! They were insiders of the Democratic Party and they stage managed the candidacy of Walter Mondale. This notion that you have that the Democrats are some sort of threadbare populist party is just laughable.
Here’s the reason to support the Republican Party… it represents the values of old fashioned macho men, and you are one of them. You’ll find over time that this overrides all other issues. Do you really want to live in the wimped out, sissified, feminized, sanitized and dreadfully boring future envisioned by the Democrats?
Frankly, I’d rather see men return to their vision of war as adventure and romance. It’s a healthier outlook. Quit worrying about justice. That’s nonsense. Worry about whether the world of the future will be worth living in, or whether it will be the nightmare of boredom the Democrats want to create.
People have to feel loyalty to more than themselves. They will always feel loyalty to their group. If loyalty to a nation is destroyed, then loyalty will contract to one’s race, religion or ethnic group. Dems are destroying loyalty to the nation by wishing that the nation will lose a war. This is a very bad and dangerous tactic to be against your country in war. It’s not that loyalty does not have risks. But the risks of non loyalty are greater than the risks of loyalty. And to say to people, you are dying because of the evil and stupidity of your leaders, you have been fooled this is wrong. Muslims know what they are dying for, their religion, their culture, their own kind. They are not being told that it’s all worthless. Americans are dying for our country and our culture which muslims want to destroy. The wish that dems have that the US will be hurt would have been considered as treason at one time. In the long term this tactic will not prove victorious for the dems. The voters will not forget their malice and that they seem to be against their own country. I also disagree with the notion that by fighting back we provoked muslims. They already hated us, for years, for decades. Also in Iraq the fighting is coming from Husseins’ group, the sunnis which are a minority in Iraq. They are the ones killing their fellow muslims. the majority is not doing that.
Stephen writes:
>>>”Cobra, listing casualties and costs doesn’t really mean anything.”
>>>”The ultimate goal is the sissification of all men.”
>>>”Frankly, I’d rather see men return to their vision of war as adventure and romance.”
Stephen, just keep on posting statements like this…PLEASE. You should be required reading for anybody comtemplating a conservative conversion.
Anita writes:
>>>”Americans are dying for our country and our culture which muslims want to destroy.”
Are you declaring war on one billion muslims, or just the ones that attacked us on 9/11–which didn’t happen to have originated in Iraq?
>>>”People have to feel loyalty to more than themselves. They will always feel loyalty to their group.”
Which is why I support Affirmative Action.
>>>”If loyalty to a nation is destroyed, then loyalty will contract to one’s race, religion or ethnic group.”
Since when does being a loyal American require blind obediance to the President’s policies? Did you have blind obediance to Clinton?
>>>”And to say to people, you are dying because of the evil and stupidity of your leaders, you have been fooled this is wrong.”
If a President’s plan has the troops marching off cliffs, would you support the strategy?
–Cobra
No, Cobra, Dems aren’t doing any of the horrible things you listed, but despite that, Dems show more animosity and old-fashioned hatred for the President and the GOP than they do for the people who are doing the horrible things you listed. I know many (maybe too many) Dems who can say without hesitation, “I hate Bush and the GOP,” but very few, if any, who say without first adding some qualifier, “I hate bin Laden, Hussein and al Qaeda.”
Here’s a good example: John Kerry sent an e-mail to his supporters this week in which he warned, “Each move they make we’ll meet head on. We’ll act quickly, decisively, and we won’t yield an inch.” Is he referring to al Qaeda or terrorists in general? Well, no, not really. He was referring to Republican fund-raising efforts.
So, I’ll say it again: It must be interesting to be part of a party that can only know success if America is defeated. Maybe Dems should begin by determining who is THEIR real enemy.
You have not responded in any substantive manner to what I had to say, Cobra. This is a habit of yours.
Do you have anything substantive to say?
I live outside the world of politics. To say that I am “conservative” is really quite meaningless.
Try answering me. Do you really want to live in the brutally boring, sissified world that the left wants to create? I don’t care about groups. Do you have a life as an individual?
Your obsession with abstract issues of justice is nonsense. You are continually barking up the wrong tree, a result of a lifetime of indoctrination at the hands of white liberals who have manipulated you into believing that conning white men will produce stuff that you can consume.
Try reading Alan Watts’ “The Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are.”
The D Stands For Defeat
I was just listening to a podcast with a recording of one of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean’s frenzied speeches, where he is shouting like a man posessed, in an attempt to whip up the crowd into a frenzy.The kind of demagogue speech…
All Things Beautiful TrackBack ‘The D Stands For Defeat’:
“The Democratic leadership has decided to elevate surrender to a party platform for the upcoming elections, with their national chairman, House leader, and last presidential nominee all running up the white flag as the Democratic war banner.”
Whats interesting about dean is that his statements attract much condemnation, but then later turn out to be correct. He reacted negatively to Powell’s UN speech, he said the war wasn’t over when baghdad was captured, and he said it wasn’t over when saddam was captured either. Everytime he was criticised, by among others, the liberal media. Everytime he was right.
“Do you really want to live in the brutally boring, sissified world that the left wants to create?”
Will there be no more whining on the internet in your world?
Alexandra writes:
>>>””The Democratic leadership has decided to elevate surrender to a party platform for the upcoming elections, with their national chairman, House leader, and last presidential nominee all running up the white flag as the Democratic war banner.”
You folks are hilarious. What does this man have to say about this?
>>>”Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) strongly criticized yesterday the White House’s new line of attack against critics of its Iraq policy, saying that “the Bush administration must understand that each American has a right to question our policies in Iraq and should not be demonized for disagreeing with them.”
…””To question your government is not unpatriotic — to not question your government is unpatriotic,” Hagel said, arguing that 58,000 troops died in Vietnam because of silence by political leaders. “America owes its men and women in uniform a policy worthy of their sacrifices.”
Hagel said Democrats have an obligation to be constructive in their criticism, but he accused the administration of “dividing the country” with its rhetorical tactics.”
Republican Chuck Hagel outflanks Bush
Actus, you’re absolutely correct about Howard Dean and his statements. And compound this by the fact that the Bush Administration is running around announcing troop reduction plans (notwithstanding the fact the insurgency is unabated, and security on the ground in Iraq is WORSENING) for 2006.
So this is not really a question about Murtha’s withdrawal plan being right or wrong. It’s more of question of whether his plan goes into effect 6 months from now, or 18.
Bush to Cut and Run in 2006
–Cobra
I’ve been reading for quite some time about plans to cut back on our presence in Iraq. It’s always been anticipate that that would happen as the Iraqi police and military were trained.
If you plan to do something, and then somebody else tells you to do that thing, are you now doing it because you were told to?
Since Dean is always right, that must explain why he won so many primaries and won the Dems nomination for president. It also explains why so many Dems have lined up behind him to support his statements (although they have done it in an overly subtle way by stating repeatedly, “Howard Dean doesn’t speak for me”).
If this is the way Dems feel (and I think it is overall), please, please let him speak loudly and often on the Dems behalf.
“Since Dean is always right, that must explain why he won so many primaries and won the Dems nomination for president”
Being right doesn’t have much to do with political victories. What planet are you from?
“It also explains why so many Dems have lined up behind him to support his statements (although they have done it in an overly subtle way by stating repeatedly, “Howard Dean doesn’t speak for me”).”
That happened the previous times Dean was right too.
Actus writes:
>>>”Being right doesn’t have much to do with political victories.”
So very true. And to hammer this point home to our friend el blogero…
237 Bush Administration Misleads on Iraq
A comprehensive report by Henry Waxman. I strongly recommend all of the “stay the course…to hell with casualties…trust the neo-con plan” types in here read this with your morning coffee.
–Cobra
Oh, yes, I will be sure to read the objective report of Democrat Congressman Waxman. And I hope that Dean will continue to be “right” loudly and publicly and with as many political victories as he racked up during the 2004 season.
I must admit I like actus’s and Cobra’s new rallying cry and slogan for the Dems, “Being right has nothing to do with political victories.” For America’s sake, I hope that Dean and the party faithful adopt your attititude and strive to be “right” rather than to win office.
“For America’s sake, I hope that Dean and the party faithful adopt your attititude and strive to be “right” rather than to win office.”
Oh. I’m not saying its the correct course to take.
el blogero writes:
>>>”I must admit I like actus’s and Cobra’s new rallying cry and slogan for the Dems, “Being right has nothing to do with political victories.” For America’s sake, I hope that Dean and the party faithful adopt your attititude and strive to be “right” rather than to win office.”
So what you’re saying is that you will support the current Administration no matter how much they mislead, misplan, misinterpret and mismanage…no matter how many American casualties pile up…no matter how much debt is acquired…no matter what?
And you’re claiming I have an unreasonable position?
–Cobra
Cobra, if you can find that sentiment in anything I have written, then you are a magician.
I remember that when my daughter was seven years old, she asked me what made a person a Republican or a Democrat. I told her that everybody wants what’s best for the country; we only differ in what that is and how to go about getting there.
Was I wrong?
> Was I wrong?
That depends. How long ago was your daughter seven?