Good News In Iraq = Bad News For Dems

DuH2 · #1 (**permalink**) 12-23-2007, 09:10 PM

Quote:

October 25, 2007- By Cal Thomas
Last week, ABC's Charles Gibson introduced a segment about Iraq on "World News Tonight" with this curious remark: "The news is (pause for effect) that there is no news. The police told us today that, to their knowledge, there were no major acts of violence. Attacks are down in Baghdad and today no bombings or roadside explosions were reported."

In a war that has consumed more than 4,100 coalition partner lives (more than 3,800 of them Americans) and additional thousands of Iraqi lives and that has as its stated objective a lessening of the shootings, bombings and killings, an average person might rejoice at such news. The big media and their auxiliary in the left wing of the Democratic Party do not regard "no news" as good news, but as the worst possible news, because it threatens to undermine their political objective: the defeat of Republicans in the next election, even at the cost of losing a war.

Not all Democrats feel this way, of course, but their congressional leaders do. They have invested their political capital in defeat. So many Democrats (again, not all) are counting on a U.S. loss in this war - and have made outrageous statements about America's inability to succeed - that success will give the national security issue completely to the Republicans, even as Republicans have lost sole ownership of the less spending and smaller government issue.

Democrats know that national security and the ability to successfully wage war against America's enemies trumps everything else. If the war is won, Democrats' prospects for victory next year are greatly diminished.

The evidence of improvement in Iraq is coming with greater frequency and credibility. A trickle of good news is becoming a stream. It's too early to predict a tide, but things are at least - and at last - beginning to flow in the right direction. On the heels of improvements in the once-chaotic Anbar province comes Fallujah, a region that once resembled our Wild West with lawlessness and disorder everywhere. While one still wouldn't want to plan a family vacation in Fallujah just yet, U.S. Marines are now getting cooperation from the previously uncooperative Sunni sheikhs in driving out al-Qaida.

Writing in The Wall Street Journal (Oct. 20), Michael Ledeen, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, quotes a Marine officer friend as saying he has been told by enlisted Marines, "There's nobody to shoot (in Fallujah), sir. If it's just going to be building schools and hospitals, that's what the Army is for, isn't it?" Basra, too, where British soldiers are pulling out, was said to be on the verge of exploding since Shiite militias backed by Iran supposedly were poised to impose a fundamentalist regime on the city. It isn't happening. Violence in Basra has declined significantly in recent weeks.

This is not to excuse the Bush administration from its serious mistakes and bad judgment in the early going in Iraq, but as Dorothy Fields and Cy Coleman wrote in the Broadway musical, "Seesaw," "It's not where you start, but where you finish." The last part of that lyric is: "and you're gonna finish on top."

If the United States and its coalition forces finish on top by achieving most, if not all, of their objectives in Iraq, what can the Democrats say? "We were secretly in support of the war all the way." Not even Hillary Clinton could get away with such a whopper. The Republican campaign commercials would pound away with the hundreds (thousands?) of quotes from people they will label as "defeatist Democrats." As this week's lead editorial in The Weekly Standard asks, "Are the American people likely to elect the candidate of a party that has tried its best to lose a winnable war?"

The answer is no. And the answer to Charles Gibson's assertion that no news is not news is that no violence is news and, indeed, is very good news for Iraq and for America. It is very bad news, however, for the leadership of the Democratic Party, because its investment in defeat may be about to prove itself the political equivalent of the dot-com bubble burst earlier this decade.

http://www.tylerpaper.com/article/20...0303/710240345

....

Quote:

Dem leaders pressured to alter war strategy
By: John Bresnahan and Martin Kady II
December 21, 2007 09:12 AM EST

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, despite their pledges to continue pushing to end the war in Iraq, face growing pressure from their rank-and-file Democrats to focus more attention on domestic, “pocketbook” issues in the upcoming election year.

Junior Democrats describe an “Iraq fatigue” setting in among some members after dozens of successful withdrawal votes failed to drive a wedge between Republicans and President Bush on the war strategy.

The restless Democrats acknowledge the war issue remains critically important for the country, but they would like to see their leaders tone down the rhetoric and avoid showdowns with Bush over the war, wherever possible.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.c...FD991130302E1B

Schizowallflower · #2 (**permalink**) 12-26-2007, 08:10 PM

While the Republicans aren't necessarily "winning", the Democrats ARE losing. End of story. Iraq is getting "better and better" with each passing moment. Bush and his "followers" may not be the "smartest bunch" around, but they certainly aren't the dumbest.

And yes, I realize I'm starting to talk like Nonsqtr.

glitch · #3 (**permalink**) 12-26-2007, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schizowallflower

And yes, I realize I'm starting to talk like Nonsqtr.

As long as you stay away from the giggly faces all over everything I think you'll be okay.

southwillrise · #4 (**permalink**) 12-27-2007, 01:46 PM

I think it's a little too late for any so called "good" news to help a political party. I didn't know that's what this war was about anyway.

The false WWD scare has been deeply ingrained in the American public like Pearl Harbor beginning WWII.

I would wager that the false statements leading up to the war have already been included in the 2008 history books used in schools.

History has already been written - no matter how hard Karl Rove may try to rearrange it.

What will really drive the Bush supporters crazy will be that the war may slow down under the next administration instead of escalating.

The only other comparison is when Bobby Kennedy was killed - his presidency would have ended the war while Nixon came in and escalated it.

If Guiliani or Romney get in they may escalate it to show how conservative they are.

DuH2 · #5 (**permalink**) 01-03-2008, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Domestic Issues Now Outweigh Iraq

By ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: January 3, 2008
DES MOINES — The Democratic and Republican presidential candidates are navigating a far different set of issues as they approach the Iowa caucuses on Thursday than when they first started campaigning here a year ago, and that is likely to change even more as the campaigns move to New Hampshire and across the country.

Even though polls show that Iowa Democrats still consider the war in Iraq the top issue facing the country, the war is becoming a less defining issue among Democrats nationally, and it has moved to the back of the stage in the rush of campaign rallies, town hall meetings and speeches that are bringing the caucus competition to an end. Instead, candidates are being asked about, and are increasingly talking about, the mortgage crisis, rising gas costs, health care, immigration, the environment and taxes.

.........

Quote:

Part of the shift appears to stem from the reduction in violence in Iraq after President Bush’s decision to send more troops there last year. Mrs. Clinton, who once faced intense opposition from her party’s left over her vote to authorize the war, now is rarely pressed on it, though Democrats say it continues be a drag on her in this state. Senator John McCain, a strong proponent of increased troop levels, is off of the defensive and now positions himself as having been prescient about what would work to quell the violence.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/03/us...AgWGZQxPCD2EwA

97240sx · #6 (**permalink**) 01-03-2008, 08:49 PM

I don't even know what your point is anymore, Duh.

justabubba · #7 (**permalink**) 01-03-2008, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 97240sx

I don't even know what your point is anymore, Duh.

he doesn't have one; he's just being duh

DuH2 · #8 (**permalink**) 01-03-2008, 10:02 PM

1. Act stupid.
2. Get another actor to laugh about your comments of being stupid.
3. Hope for an argument.
4. Attempt you use said argument to bury thread points.
5. Repeat acting stupid.

In terms of Far Lefty forum games this ones like number 4 or 5 in commonality.

How about this..If you don't READ and cannot figure out the point of this thread on your own. Then leave this thread.

97240sx · #9 (**permalink**) 01-04-2008, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuH2

2. Get another actor to laugh about your comments of being stupid.
In terms of Far Lefty forum games this ones like number 4 or 5 in commonality.

I thought all our actors were out there on the far right?

Hard-Driver · #10 (**permalink**) 01-04-2008, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuH2

1. Act stupid.
2. Get another actor to laugh about your comments of being stupid.
3. Hope for an argument.
4. Attempt you use said argument to bury thread points.
5. Repeat acting stupid.

In terms of Far Lefty forum games this ones like number 4 or 5 in commonality.

How about this..If you don't READ and cannot figure out the point of this thread on your own. Then leave this thread.

You certainly have the first point down.

I would still say that the Iraq war is BAD NEWS for the republicans no matter how dizzy you make yourself trying to spin it.

I would also add that the majority of the American people agree with the democrats in any polling I have seen.

Finally, there are lots of issues that will bury the republicans in the next elections besides the war.

So while you can sit on here and make this same posts about success in Iraq being bad for democrats over and over, I am sure that most Americans don't care about your twisted partisian spin. Most Americans are glad things have taken a shift to less violence in Iraq, but they still don't like the party of lies, war, torture, greed, fear, invasion of privacy, and unconstitutional abuse of power.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode