In enemy's corner Harry "The Loser" Reid
Jed Babbin:
I think Democrats like Reid are content to lose because they see political gain in defeat in the short run. But their politics of fraud is being exposed. As Babbin points out during the campaign they assured the country that they were not for a cut and run policy which the Republicans had charged. After they one, Reid still maintained that they would not defend the war. Now only a few months later he is claiming the election was a mandate for defeat and for a cut and run policy.
This is fraud on a grand scale and Republicans need to describe it for what it is. If they do the media will have to start questioning the Democrats on the issue and there are questions they cannot truthfully answer.
The Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, believes the war in Iraq is lost. There is nothing about that conclusion that bothers Reid: He is as blasé as he is certain, as resolute in pursuit of defeat as Churchill was in pursuit of victory. Last November, the Democrats seized control of Congress on the pretense that they wanted to change our policy to Iraq but not -- as they, to a man (and a woman) insisted -- to merely cut and run. We knew they weren’t being truthful then, but too many people were taken in. Now all pretense is dispensed with: we can see the man behind the curtain.There is much more between the ...'s.
On Thursday, Reid said: "I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week." He said that in the middle of a week when some 146,000 Americans are serving in Iraq, and at least 6 have died. He said that at a time when the troop surge announced by President Bush has only managed to deliver three of five brigades -- about 60% of the planned 21,000 additional troops -- to Iraq. The fact that the surge hasn’t had a chance to work is much less important to Reid and the Dems than the political mileage they may gain from declaring it a failure.
How many times have we heard the Dems insist that they support the troops? It’s one of their mantras. If something isn’t “for the children”, it’s to “support the troops.” But it’s false, just as their insistence last fall that they wouldn’t cut and run was. All of that pales in comparison to one single fact: Reid and the rest of the Democrats do not condemn defeat. They do not say they would have done better to win, because the words “win” and “victory” never pass their lips. They never propose an idea that might lead to quicker, more decisive victory in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or the Horn of Africa, or Lebanon, or anywhere else. No. The Democratic pathology is the same now as it was forty years ago.
...
Let’s be plain: we are at war with those who adhere to radical Islam. It is an ideology, not a religion. Our goal is not -- cannot -- be to implant democracy in the Middle East. Democracy is a system of government not, as the neocons say, a weapon. We must defeat the enemy by defeating his ideology and compelling -- by violent means as may be necessary -- those nations who support the terrorist to stop doing so. When that task is done, the war is won. And not one moment before.
...
Harry Reid’s statement compels one more conclusion: that the Democrats are incapable of leading this nation to victory against this existential threat.
...
I think Democrats like Reid are content to lose because they see political gain in defeat in the short run. But their politics of fraud is being exposed. As Babbin points out during the campaign they assured the country that they were not for a cut and run policy which the Republicans had charged. After they one, Reid still maintained that they would not defend the war. Now only a few months later he is claiming the election was a mandate for defeat and for a cut and run policy.
This is fraud on a grand scale and Republicans need to describe it for what it is. If they do the media will have to start questioning the Democrats on the issue and there are questions they cannot truthfully answer.
Comments
Post a Comment