Bwup-Bwup-Bwaaaa!
Here we go. The Associated Press, spokeswire service of the Party of Surrender, sounds the retreat. Dems Risk Image Woes over Anti-War Moves:
Democrats face a host of risks as they move toward more substantive steps to tie President Bush’s hands with funding restrictions on the Iraq war.
Leaders are wary of allowing the more intense anti-war activists define the party’s image.
Simmering divisions within the ranks over how soon to move — and how far to go — could quickly diminish a tactical victory this week on a resolution criticizing Bush’s conduct of the war.
“There are those in our caucus who would rather we not do anything, and there will be people who want to see us extricate ourselves overnight. We’ll have to balance those interests,” said Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, House Democrats’ chief vote-counter. “We’re not going to sit anybody out, but we will have to decide how to weigh those things.”
You were expecting action from dithering Defeatocrats? If the AP is zeroing in on this, it must be serious. Seriously hilarious.
Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, tasked by Democrats to direct the next step, says his approach “stops the surge, for all intents and purposes,” and would “force a redeployment _ not by taking money away, by redirecting money.”
Former Rep. Martin Frost, D-Texas, said Democrats have made a “very clear point” this week by putting the House on record against Bush’s troop buildup and now must be careful not to overplay their hand by seeking to cut off funding or limit deployments right away.
“They don’t want to be a scapegoat for the Bush administration’s failures,” Frost said. “This is Bush’s war, and there should be no confusion about who’s war it is, and Democrats should not set themselves up to have that done to them.”
Frost said he did not want to “prejudge” Murtha’s effort to restrict funds, but cautioned that Democrats should not yield to intense pressure by outside anti-war groups for swift action to end the conflict.
Now, how about ending the nonsense before any of these stupid votes to undermine U.S. troops in the field?
Powerline, commenting on the same AP surrender clarion call, notes the lack of anything even mildly useful being proposed by the Democrats.
Topics: Iraq, Uncategorized
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 1:00 pm on Friday, February 16, 2007
6 Responses to “Bwup-Bwup-Bwaaaa!”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
February 16th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
Dhimms New Strategy: Bleed The Troops — Update 2
See previous: House Dhimms New Strategy: Bleed The Troops, House Dhimms New Strategy: Bleed The Troops — UpdateThe Cat’s Out of the BagPosted by Dean Barnett The eagle-eyed NZ Bear while running the show at the Victory Caucus noticed a
February 16th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Bless their tiny little hearts. Damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. Paint meets corner.
God, but they’re a bunch of sniveling cowards. Can’t they stand up and say what they think–and then stand by it? Perhaps they haven’t taken enough polls yet to know what they think. Somebody call Zogby!
February 16th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
There’s Chuckie Shumer talking about the relative risks for each party. HELLO, chuckster, what about trying to decide what’s best for the country instead of making cynical political calculations based on the benefits to your party.
I know, I know…
February 16th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
If Congress strangles the war effort, and Iraq collapses in a bloody massacre, only to end up in the hands of a thug again, I know who I’m going to blame. And it’s not George Bush.
February 16th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Loathsome, Feckless, and Reckless
The one question that goes unasked is how exactly does defunding and limiting the President’s ability to function as Commander in Chief during wartime improves US national security?
February 16th, 2007 at 10:15 pm
Democrat definitions of “change in course”: a retrospective
Prior to the election, the American people were promised by Democrats hoping to get elected or re-elected or Dems who were trying to help out either that we needed a ‘change in course’ in Iraq. That ‘change in course’ was a bit…