Apr 24 2007
Democrats Bail On Senator Surrender
Senate Majority Leader, Senator Surrender from Nevada, seems to have been left high and dry by his caucus regarding is accidental exposure of his true feelings regarding our nation’s efforts in Iraq:
“I understand what he was trying to say,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), although she acknowledged that Reid’s comments had caused a political problem for Democrats. “I think it was more a problem of tone rather than of substance.”
Tone? The man unilaterally surrendered to al Qaeda. There is no grey area here and he REFUSES to recant -which is an indication he means what he said. The US lost to al Qaeda and Iran (even though we have yet to lose any battle and continue to pacify regions of Iraq).
None of almost a dozen Democrats contacted by The Politico said they agreed with Reid’s statement. Instead, they support what they believed was his overall theme: The war cannot be won militarily, and the president must adjust his strategy. They just wouldn’t have said it as Reid did.
Reid made the idiotic claim we can ‘win’ without the military. Bush and others acknowledge military force ALONE is not the answer. But Reid is dumb enough to think if we disarm and run away al Qaeda will surrender. Is ignorance is impressive.
“Not at this point in time,” said Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). “But Harry knows a lot more than I do” about the progress of the war.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) said he “would have focused on the mission and transforming the strategy.”
Some launched into Clintonesque explanations.
“I think it depends entirely on what your definition of ‘lost’ means. That sounded familiar, didn’t it?” former senator John Edwards, a Democratic presidential candidate, said to laughter on Ed Schultz’s radio talk show Monday.
People are dying, al Qaeda is ramping up its bloodlust so the Dems remain weak-kneed and afraid, and Edwards is giggling like an idiot. Others are claiming they don’t know enough (maybe they should attend the briefings they have skipped out on for nearly two months?). It seems ignorance and stupidity is the new Dem excuse for being lost on the subject:
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) deflected the question, saying that the war was never defined and that his 2002 vote should not have been construed as a green light to invade Iraq.
Fool. He was voting on what Bush was planning to do – not what he was fantasizing about. The “I did not understand” excuse is wearing thin – but appropriate. They were clueless then and are more clueless now. And from the Duh! Files we get this gem of brilliance from another Dem Senator:
Landrieu spokesman Adam Sharp said the ad’s question had already been answered: The senator distanced herself last week from Reid’s comment.
“I do not agree that the war is lost,” Landrieu said in a statement. “It clearly has yet to be won,…
Really? Maybe you should inform Senator Surrender before he gives up Spain. Reid screwed up royally and his party is running for the exits. And his ego is too shallow to admit he screwed up, so he keeps on making Bin Laden’s day as he stubbornly refuses to admit he is the one who is lost and will lose. Senator Surrender, do what you do best and just give up on this one.
Reid doesn’t believe the war in Iraq is lost. His is afraid it will be won and soon. His rhetoric is to discourage the country from going forward with the war. He is trying to whip up anti-war sentiments with the public. He evidently is unaware that though the country is weary of the war, the public doean’t think the US can be defeated. Most of the public has wanted the military to be more pre-emptive and they are doing so now. More and more success stories are coming out of Iraq and the dims are running scared. All their witchhunt investigations are coming to nothing and they have nothing else.
Reid is a narrow, little man with a narrow, little small mind. Party first, country last is his motto. And not only does he look like a man with a small mind he looks like a mean little man. He desperately wants the dims to win the presidency because that is where the real money and power is. Just think how his horizons can be expanded beyond his piddling little land scams if the dims were in the WH. However, he doesn’t have the moxie that Feinstein has. She made a hell of a lot more money off the taxpayers than Reid has with her chairmanship in MILCOM. It is a wonder to me that any dims can hold their heads up and not be bent down with shame.
I think they honestly believe that if we don’t fight, everyone will be nice to us. Remember that next time a gunman starts shooting in a building near you. Just walk up to him and offer him a donut. That should solve everything!
Oh, and I have two uncles who have been lifelong Democrats. Have a cousin in Iraq. Both uncles are telling me that they have never in their life seen anything like that which is coming out of the Democratic party right now. Both said they are voting Republican in the next election of the Democrats don’t “straighten up and fly right”.
AJ
I have been for many years out to the anti-war sites you see on the bottom of the banners and posters carried by the war protesters.
Right now they are having major fits saying the can’t understand why the average American isn’t buying into their song and dance.
They are hoping for a grassroots Woodstock moment to gel support
If you look at the web of all those sites and the linkages of common personnel and funding sources you understand why they are having a lesser effect now then the last time.
Their budget is down because Russia is dragging themselves back from the financial brink and can only give them “keep the home lights burning money”.
This is about more than Reid and Iraq, it is also about who runs foreign policy. I think it is dawning on some of the Democrats that someday they might win back the White House and it would be nice if it was not in ruins when they did. What goes around and all that.
But the truth is the Democrats are saying that all the violence in Iraq is just a civil conflict we have no place in. BS. Those nine soldiers who were killed by AlQaida were killed as part of a larger operation against AlQaida in Diyala. It seems that a lot of terrorists went up there when the surge was announced and they have been busy trying to bully the locals. The locals have not appreciated the invasion from AlQaida and have been working more and more with the Americans. Something like 134 terrorists have been killed up there in the last month. But to the Democrats it is all mindless random sectarian violence.
The truth is if we leave Iraq, there is no point in staying in Afghanistan. There is no point in worrying about Darfur or the Middle East or any of it. If we run from Iraq our allies will never trust again. The terrorists will never fear us again and all the world will see when they look at us is a undignified political cat fight.
Lindsay Graham asked a good question, If we lost…who won?
AJ I hear there is a new David Broder piece in the Post telling the DEMs Reid should be dumped. Anyone seen the piece yet?
Jimbo1,
It was a radio interview picked up and written on a liberal blog site here. Enjoy.
Thank you AJ….you da man. I’ve been hunting all over for it.
I think they honestly believe that if we don’t fight, everyone will be nice to us.
Crosspatch, you give the Donks way too much credit on the intellectual front. I don’t think they’ve thought that far ahead.
No, they have only thought as far ahead as to discredit Bush in any way possible. That is their platform and it stands alone with nothing else.
Guys, I dread the morning when I wake up, like I did on 9/11 and KNOW that something terrible just happened. I don’t want to EVER have that feeling again. I must tell you however, that if our politicians insist on continuing this suicidal tangent they are on, we may all wake up and find not 3,000 dead but 30,000 or, God forbid, 300,000!
HARRY REID MUST RESIGN FOLLOWED BY NANCY PELOSI and anyone else who cannot get behind this country and show that Americans do NOT quit and they certainly do NOT surrender!!
If a republican had said anything even close to what Reid said it would be demanded that he resign and he would have to. But the dims have different standards. They can say and do anything they want and the media will support them.
Harry Reid is a traitor. He is actively working against the country and giving aid to our enemies. And so is Pelosi. Is there nothing we can do to prevent these people from destroying our country? Do we really have to wait until 2008 and hope the electorate is aware of what the dims are doing and vote them out of office?
Several months ago, I say a bumper sticker that said “Had enough?” in regard to republican control of congress. I am now asking everyone “Have you had enough now?” with the dim control?