Vulture politics on the left

Dean Barnett:

On April 18, 2007, a series of five car bombs hit Baghdad, killing almost 200 people. Showing his customary lack of restraint and his trademark political opportunism, the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, attempted to score partisan points. Seeking out a gaggle of press microphones the next day, Reid proclaimed, "This war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week." Reid's comments, so close on the heels of a massacre, provided a tidy snapshot of how the vultures of the left operate. Whether in the blogosphere, the mainstream media, or even the U.S. Senate, they wait for bad news from Iraq and then swoop in with abandon to derive political benefit from a tragedy.

Reid's declaration of defeat would be an especially poignant embarrassment were the left capable of embarrassment. First of all, the intemperate and ludicrously premature comments in question came not from some 20-something blogger but from the Senate majority leader. And Reid was audaciously careless with the facts. When he declared the surge a failure in April 2007, it hadn't even fully begun. A large portion of the surge troops had yet to arrive in Iraq. The strategic changes that General David Petraeus was implementing were still in their nascent stage. Reid doubtless knew all of this, and yet still called the surge a failure.

But Reid's cravenness in this episode plumbed still greater depths. A ranking member of the U.S. government, Reid responded to a major terrorist attack by calling for surrender. If Reid had any concerns about how our enemies might take such a response and how it might incentivize their future actions, he didn't let those concerns slow his rush to criticize the Bush administration.

The vultures of the left habitually hover, waiting for bad news from Iraq. Whatever bad thing happens becomes their propaganda item du jour. For instance, the 4,000th American casualty in Iraq triggered a paroxysm of "commemoration" in the leftwing blogosphere and other anti-Bush outposts.

Some people insist that those on the left who mark such "grim milestones" do so because they are sincerely grieved. While it's impossible to know what lies in the hearts of the vultures, an objective look can't help but raise questions about just how grief-stricken they are. In the days before the 4,000th casualty occurred, one could almost sense the anticipation. When the time came, some left-wing websites chose to "honor" the fallen by running a portrait of George W. Bush and John McCain composed of tiny pictures of the 4,000 fallen. One wonders whether those involved in the project asked the families of the fallen if they felt this was an appropriate use of their loved ones' images.

What Reid and his fellow vultures reveal is that much of the American left reached its conclusions about Iraq long ago, even though the picture was fluid. These people won't let new facts disturb their settled view. Regardless of any results of the surge, Reid had his story and he was sticking to it. Even if the surge reduced civilian casualties by, say, 80 percent, Reid knew he would never concede its effectiveness.

...

After the fighting in Basra wound down last week, the vultures of the left once again took flight, and once more Harry Reid led the flock. While people of good will on both left and right were trying to figure out what the fighting in Basra meant, Reid needed no time to gather facts. Instead, he leapt to his usual conclusions....

...

When you are looking for an excuse to lose anyone will do. The left acts as if the war should turn on the misfortunes of a few. But they really do not care about them. They just care about losing. In fact it is very important to the left that we lose this war. They want it to be a disaster so they can use it as an excuse against the use of force in the future. That is why you get the ridiculous hyperbole about the war and the President's leadership.

They are mostly hypocrites who are not really anti war, they are just anti our side of the war. They have no real criticism of a wicked enemy that is trying to destroy this country and our way of life including theirs.

Comments

  1. "... it is very important to the left that we lose this war. They want it to be a disaster so they can use it as an excuse against the use of force in the future."

    "They are mostly hypocrites who are not really anti war, they are just anti our side of the war."

    Excellent points! Based on their actions and rhetoric, it's undeniable that Reid and the other phony patriots would be happy to risk the lives of their own citizens as long as it makes a Republican look bad in the process.

    http://VocalMinority.typepad.com
    Jewish AND Republican!? Oy gevalt!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Is the F-35 obsolete?