Party Of Whatever (Two-Faced Dems Want It Both Ways On Iraq)

Iraq: Why did Democrats shut down the Senate on Tuesday? To make a point against the war. No, wait. They say they support the troops. Could it be that they're trying to have it both ways?

What then? The logical endpoint of such a strategy is withdrawal from Iraq. After all, if the war is shown to be a mistake, why keep fighting it?

That's the view of the Democratic Party's anti-war base. But the party can't win elections with votes only from its Cindy Sheehan wing. It needs to appeal to people in the political center, who may dislike the war but are uncomfortable with the idea of simply leaving Iraqis to the tender mercies of al-Qaida. These are voters who understand that "supporting the troops" goes beyond just giving them the right armor and weapons. It also means supporting what the troops are trying to do.

It's something else, though, to attack the mission itself as fundamentally wrong, a mistake from the start. That's what the Senate Democrats were doing with their Tuesday tantrum. They not only want a report on prewar intelligence, they want a particular result: A finding that the Bush administration deliberately took America into a war on false pretenses.

They had hoped that the CIA leak investigation would turn up something like that, and it didn't. Now they're trying to get the intelligence committee to produce the smoking gun. So are they the antiwar party? Just watch what they do, not what they say.

At least the hard-left types are clear about their aims. Reid's stunt served no purpose other than to undermine public support for the war. If that's not his goal, he needs to explain what is.

There is something fundamentally wrong with a party that will sell out America, and just as important, the troops, to achieve their ends.

For them, politics trumps patriotism, every time.

Like Andrea Mitchell's report on "secret prisons" operated by America in other countries, insinuating that they are torture centers, and using the opportunity to bring up pix from the aberrations at Abu Graib.

How does that help the troops?

By ensuring their safety? No.

By stopping terrorists? No.

By creating and sensationalizing a so-called story making America and President Bush look bad in the MidEast, and giving the terrorists more reason to attack our troops, kill innocents and get the feeling that their heinous activities are undermining our efforts via the MSM? BINGO!!!!

The Andrea Mitchells of the world are inadvertantly (I hope) aiding and abetting the terrorist's activities by providing the one thing they seek most: publicity.

The Dems are augmenting that aid by acting like little babies, attacking the President at every turn, as if their actions and reports of it stopped at the water's edge.

Can they really be that stupid or have that much tunnel vision that they cannot see the obvious? I half hope so, because if they realize what they are doing, it is sedition, pure and simple.

They voted for it. Now, its alright to change one's minds but at least have the guts to be open about it. The Democrats dare not say they agree completely with Jihad Cindy...

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We're Know We're Dead Wrong.")

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.