Birds of a feather...
| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Democrats Still Search for Plan on How to Deal With Iraq |
| 2005-12-09 |
| Could someone please tell them that we have Saddam in custody! And that the Iraqis will be voting in mass for the third time this year on the 15th, ANNNNNNNNDDD that they do not want the Dems plan involved, cuz after the 15th the Iraqis will have their own fully functioning government! Congressional Democrats were quick on Wednesday to criticize President Bush's latest speech citing progress in Iraq. But Democrats are having trouble coming up with a plan of their own... |
| Posted by:RG |
| #7 "Democrats Still Search for Plan on How to Deal With Iraq" Here's a plan, elegant in its simplicity: We and the normal Iraqi people win, terrorists & Baathists (but I repeat myself) LOSE. You're welcome. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-12-09 18:11 |
| #6 TS, nice historical notes, thanks. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2005-12-09 13:51 |
| #5 Birds of a feather... |
| Posted by: BigEd 2005-12-09 13:41 |
| #4 Close circut to democrats: Here's yer plan. Coup d’état No not the President. Tell Harry Reid that his Sam Drucker schtick ain't workin and he's got to go. Yeah he's clearly a dipshit but his "Principle before Politics" charade is tranparent to even the most casual observer. Politely advise (She thinks of herself as a lady yaknow) Nancy Pelosi that stepping aside might not neccessarilary be a bad thing. It's that credibility thing. (or lack there of) Finally tell Howie Dean that he has stepped on your collective dick one to many times and has become a liability. Whats the worst that could happen? Maxine Watters may get a serious case of the vapors? |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2005-12-09 10:59 |
| #3 Democrats Still Search for Plan on How to Deal With Iraq How about pushing for victory? Hmmm? |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-12-09 10:52 |
| #2 Same plan they had in 1864 - Copperheads (Peace Democrats) Although the Democratic party had broken apart in 1860, during the secession crisis Democrats in the North were generally more conciliatory toward the South than were Republicans. They called themselves Peace Democrats; their opponents called them Copperheads because some wore copper pennies as identifying badges. A majority of Peace Democrats supported war to save the Union, but a strong and active minority asserted that the Republicans had provoked the South into secession; that the Republicans were waging the war in order to establish their own domination, suppress civil and states rights, and impose "racial equality"; and that military means had failed and would never restore the Union. Peace Democrats were most numerous in the Midwest, a region that had traditionally distrusted the Northeast, where the Republican party was strongest, and that had economic and cultural ties with the South. The Lincoln administration's arbitrary treatment of dissenters caused great bitterness there. Above all, anti-abolitionist Midwesterners feared that emancipation would result in a great migration of blacks into their states. As was true of the Democratic party as a whole, the influence of Peace Democrats varied with the fortunes of war. When things were going badly for the Union on the battlefield, larger numbers of people were willing to entertain the notion of making peace with the Confederacy. When things were going well, Peace Democrats could more easily be dismissed as defeatists. But no matter how the war progressed, Peace Democrats constantly had to defend themselves against charges of disloyalty. Revelations that a few had ties with secret organizations such as the Knights of the Golden Circle helped smear the rest. The most prominent Copperhead leader was Clement L. Valladigham of Ohio, who headed the secret antiwar organization known as the Sons of Liberty. At the Democratic convention of 1864, where the influence of Peace Democrats reached its high point, Vallandigham persuaded the party to adopt a platform branding the war a failure, and some extreme Copperheads plotted armed uprisings. However, the Democratic presidential candidate, George B. McClellan, repudiated the Vallandigham platform, victories by Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman and Phillip H. Sheridan assured Lincoln's reelection, and the plots came to nothing. With the conclusion of the war in 1865 the Peace Democrats were thoroughly discredited. Most Northerners believed, not without reason, that Peace Democrats had prolonged war by encouraging the South to continue fighting in the hope thatthe North would abandon the struggle. Source: "Historical Times Encyclopedia of the Civil War" Edited by Patricia L. Faust Just as they abandoned the blacks who'd lose their civil rights for nearly a hundred years by withdrawing the troops and ending Reconstruction, just like the Cambodians who'd lose over a million souls in the third Holocaust of the 20th Century by the withdraw of troops and cutting of the funding provided to defend themselves, the Dems will carry on their destruction of basic human rights and dignity, this time in the ME. They choose dishonor. It will not stop the war anymore than the withdraw from Mogadishu would keep the terror away. |
| Posted by: Threarong Sholump2965 2005-12-09 09:25 |
| #1 NYT must be at the threshhold of bankruptcy to start running stories like this. It only took them 35 years to figure out that people don't want to hear that defeatist bullshit all the time. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2005-12-09 09:11 |