Dems Bring Back Surrender Bill

[maineman]

With your party moving more and more to the left - they will have a difficult time in 08

that is your opinion.....

one would think that if that were manifesting itself, that the republicans in congress would be having better approval ratings than congressional democrats. It will be difficult for you to make inroads from a position where your existing congressional caucus is held in LOWER regard than the democrats....and where the American public trusts democrats more than you guys to deal with nine of ten key issues facing the country.

Seems to me like your "opinion" looks a lot like "wishful thinking".

 

[CSM]

I am for term limits and I would love to see a two term limit

The Washington Times had a great op - maybe you would like it CSM

http://www.usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=49543

LOL...interesting. I do wonder how our government would perform under a system of "benchmarks" imposed to gauge their progress!

 

[CSM]

that is your opinion.....

one would think that if that were manifesting itself, that the republicans in congress would be having better approval ratings than congressional democrats. It will be difficult for you to make inroads from a position where your existing congressional caucus is held in LOWER regard than the democrats....and where the American public trusts democrats more than you guys to deal with nine of ten key issues facing the country.

Seems to me like your "opinion" looks a lot like "wishful thinking".

I wonder what you two will argue about when Congressional approval for both parties hits zero!

 

[red states rule]

LOL...interesting. I do wonder how our government would perform under a system of "benchmarks" imposed to gauge their progress!

Congress live under the same rules they put on the rest of us?

 

[red states rule]

I wonder what you two will argue about when Congressional approval for both parties hits zero!

Dems do have a head start on us in that one

 

[CSM]

Dems do have a head start on us in that one

That is not the point. A race to the bottom between parties in Congress is just plain sad. "My 29% approval rating compared to your 25% approval rating..." is just plain sad. BOTH RATINGS SUCK!

 

[red states rule]

That is not the point. A race to the bottom between parties in Congress is just plain sad. "My 29% approval rating compared to your 25% approval rating..." is just plain sad. BOTH RATINGS SUCK!

I agree. Both parties have low ratings

But the Dems have suffered drop since they came into power 6 months ago

 

[maineman]

I agree. Both parties have low ratings

But the Dems have suffered drop since they came into power 6 months ago

and congressional republicans are even lower. which you refuse to acknowledge.

 

[maineman]

Dems do have a head start on us in that one

math is hard for you too, isn't it?

your guys in congress are lower than my guys in congress.

the people REALLY fucking can't stand your party and don't trust you as far as they can throw you.

 

[Rosotar]

I agree. Both parties have low ratings

But the Dems have suffered drop since they came into power 6 months ago

Who says the Dems are "in power?"

They have a slim majority in Congress but they are still unable to get the will of the MAJORITY of the American people done because voters didn't go quite far enough last time in breaking the stranglehold that Bush's Republican lap dogs still have on Congress.

Voters won't make the same mistake in 08.

Look for them to send the GOP packing once and for all.

 

[red states rule]

The NY Times is the publisher of the DNC talking points - and the Dems are listening


Victor Davis Hanson
The New York Times Surrenders
A monument to defeatism on the editorial page
12 July 2007

On July 8, the New York Times ran an historic editorial entitled “The Road Home,” demanding an immediate American withdrawal from Iraq. It is rare that an editorial gets almost everything wrong, but “The Road Home” pulls it off. Consider, point by point, its confused—and immoral—defeatism.

1. “It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.”

Rarely in military history has an “orderly” withdrawal followed a theater-sized defeat and the flight of several divisions. Abruptly leaving Iraq would be a logistical and humanitarian catastrophe. And when scenes of carnage begin appearing on TV screens here about latte time, will the Times then call for “humanitarian” action?

2. “Like many Americans, we have put off that conclusion, waiting for a sign that President Bush was seriously trying to dig the United States out of the disaster he created by invading Iraq without sufficient cause, in the face of global opposition, and without a plan to stabilize the country afterward.”

We’ll get to the war’s “sufficient cause,” but first let’s address the other two charges that the Times levels here against President Bush. Both houses of Congress voted for 23 writs authorizing the war with Iraq—a post-9/11 confirmation of the official policy of regime change in Iraq that President Clinton originated. Supporters of the war included 70 percent of the American public in April 2003; the majority of NATO members; a coalition with more participants than the United Nations alliance had in the Korean War; and a host of politicians and pundits as diverse as Joe Biden, William F. Buckley, Wesley Clark, Hillary Clinton, Francis Fukuyama, Kenneth Pollack, Harry Reid, Andrew Sullivan, Thomas Friedman, and George Will.

And there was a Pentagon postwar plan to stabilize the country, but it assumed a decisive defeat and elimination of enemy forces, not a three-week war in which the majority of Baathists and their terrorist allies fled into the shadows to await a more opportune time to reemerge, under quite different rules of engagement

for the complete article

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-07-12vdh.html

 

[red states rule]

It seems White Flag Harry did not want to answer some straight questions on the surrende bill

Perturbed Reid Chastises ABC's Tapper for Questioning Withdrawal: 'This Isn't a Debate'
Posted by Brent Baker on July 12, 2007 - 21:47.
ABC's Jake Tapper on Thursday night raised the prediction “genocide” will result after a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, a forecast Tapper put to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at a Capitol Hill news conference: “Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?” Reid didn't respond to the point, leading Tapper to retort in the exchange played on World News: “You didn't answer my question.” A perturbed Reid, presumably not used to challenging questions from the Washington press corps, chastised Tapper: “This isn't a debate. We're answering questions.” Tapper then repeated his question -- “Will the Iraqis be safer?” -- but Reid ignored him and moved on: “Anyone else have a question?”

Tapper's story ran a night after Wednesday's World News featured a report from Terry McCarthy in Iraq on how General David Petraeus, commander of all multi-national forces in Iraq, “is still very optimistic about the military battle, if the politicians give him enough time.”


watch the video

http://newsbusters.org/node/14061

 

[red states rule]

The liberal media is pretty much ignoring White Flag Harry's ducking of a serious and ligical question


'They' still have no plan

"Is there not a moral obligation of the United States to make sure that the Iraqi people are safe before the U.S. withdraws?" ABC News' Jake Tapper asked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday. As Mr. Tapper summarized the exchange, "I tried to get an answer... I did not succeed."



Mr. Reid's response to this very reasonable question was to dodge here, dodge there, and never answer directly. He cited Iraqi opinion polls showing that 69 percent of Iraqis feel less safe because of the U.S. presence. He cited the war's cost of many billions and the 600 dead Americans in the last six months. "That's enough," Mr. Reid said. "With all due respect, Senator, you didn't answer my question," responded Mr. Tapper. Mr. Reid's final response: "OK. This is not a debate." Indeed, real debate is the last thing Mr. Reid and the growing pro-withdrawal caucus wants.

Those now calling for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq have moral responsibilities. They must demonstrate that withdrawal makes the United States safer. They have not. They must show that a slaughter of epic proportions will not follow. They have not. They must show that an al Qaeda statelet and Iranian satellite will not result. Again, they have not.

for the complete article

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070713/EDITORIAL/107130001/1013

 

[maineman]

spam...same cut and paste crap in different threads.

 

[red states rule]

spam...same cut and paste crap in different threads.

Why not try answering the question that White Flag Harry ducked?

 

[maineman]

Why not try answering the question that White Flag Harry ducked?

I did...in the other thread where you posted the same spam.

and in that thread, not only did I answer YOUR question, but I posed on to you and watched you run away from it yet again...

solidifying your reputation as WHITE FLAG RSR!!!!

 

[red states rule]

I did...in the other thread where you posted the same spam.

and in that thread, not only did I answer YOUR question, but I posed on to you and watched you run away from it yet again...

solidifying your reputation as WHITE FLAG RSR!!!!

You spun it - you did not answer it

 

[maineman]

You spun it - you did not answer it

no spin at all.


"Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?"

possibly not. I think that when the US pulls out, the sunnis and the shiites will continue their sectarian struggle. I think that will happen if we leave in six months. I think that will happen if we leave in six years. I do not believe that the "government" of Iraq is capable of holding the country together with an army that will quickly devolve into warring sectarian militias the moment we leave.

Iraqis can chose to live in peace, but my guess is that they will not make that choice. That, however, is not our problem. Radical islamic fundamentalism is our problem and our enemy and we need to stop trying to referee a family feud in Iraq and start fighting our real enemy fulltime.

Every day we spend messing around with shiite militias or Iraqi sunni militias is a day we do not put our entire force to bear on our enemy.

now...put down the WHITE FLAG and debate that.

 

[red states rule]

no spin at all.


"Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?"

possibly not. I think that when the US pulls out, the sunnis and the shiites will continue their sectarian struggle. I think that will happen if we leave in six months. I think that will happen if we leave in six years. I do not believe that the "government" of Iraq is capable of holding the country together with an army that will quickly devolve into warring sectarian militias the moment we leave.

Iraqis can chose to live in peace, but my guess is that they will not make that choice. That, however, is not our problem. Radical islamic fundamentalism is our problem and our enemy and we need to stop trying to referee a family feud in Iraq and start fighting our real enemy fulltime.

Every day we spend messing around with shiite militias or Iraqi sunni militias is a day we do not put our entire force to bear on our enemy.

now...put down the WHITE FLAG and debate that.

So the left has no problem to the slaughter that will happen - like what happend in Viet Nam after the libs forced the US to surrender to the enemy

The slaughter win Iraq will pale to the slaughter that happened in Viet Nam

 

[maineman]

So the left has no problem to the slaughter that will happen - like what happend in Viet Nam after the libs forced the US to surrender to the enemy

The slaughter win Iraq will pale to the slaughter that happened in Viet Nam

My point was: there is nothing we can do to prevent the sectarian struggle that will occur whenever we leave. what part of that does not make it through your thick skull?

and if the slaughter in Iraq will pale to Vietnam, I guess that means it won't really be that bad in any case.