Posted on 06/26/2006 3:05:20 AM PDT by Oshkalaboomboom
It's understandable that Democrats in the U.S. Senate would use the war in Iraq to send a political message to the party faithful, as some did last week in voting for doomed resolutions to fast-track the withdrawal (or "redeployment") of U.S. forces from that country. Trouble is, the message sent to the rest of the country may be that Democrats who are more liberal can't be trusted when it comes to national security.
That message is likely to stick even if the Bush administration decides on its own to draw down the U.S. presence. Over the weekend, an administration official confirmed reports that Army Gen. George W. Casey has devised plans that could produce sharp reductions in U.S. forces as early as September and cut the number of combat brigades by nearly two-thirds by late 2007. But if President Bush follows that advice, he can say that he is simply living up to his oft-stated promise to defer to the judgment of battlefield commanders rather than play politics with troop levels.
Playing politics is, unfortunately, an apt description of last week's Senate debate. It was mostly election-year posturing. The debate gave Republicans an opportunity to warn their red-state base that Democrats wanted to "cut and run."
To no one's surprise, both Democratic proposals failed — one by a respectable margin, the other in a rout. By a 60-39 vote, the Senate rejected a "sense of the Senate" resolution by Sens. Levin and Reed calling for troop withdrawals to begin by the end of the year, with no timetable for complete withdrawal. But even if the Levin-Reed resolution had passed, it wouldn't have bound the president, any more than he was bound by an earlier bipartisan resolution expressing the hope that 2006 would be a "year of significant transition" in Iraq.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
When the LATimes (NYTimes, or WaPo) start warning Democrats about the tactics they're using and how they can be misconstrued...you'd better believe there are problems in the Dem ranks.
The RATS don't send messages to the party faithful they send them to the lunatic fringe.The party faithful are the lunatic fringe.
What can I say. The Democrats can't be trusted with national security.
They've been that way since 1972...
i believe the way to send a message to your faithful is through your platform, programs - not a hotdogging display on the floor of the US Senate to rescue your name from oblivion (sound familiar Senator from Massachusetts?). we who have family members in Iraq, Kuwait, in theater or about to be, have a low tolerance for such reckless behavior.
The message they keep sending is that they know they are out of step with the People. Every time they refuse to go on record, via a vote, to back up the tripe they spout, they prove they are just posturing and don't believe in their own crap.
They don't have any platform or programs they're unified behind. They're trying to make that sound like a positive -- but voters don't want to toss the dice when they vote for a candidate.
Was that Reed or Reid? Among buffoons, I want to get the right one.
"What can I say. The Democrats can't be trusted with national security."
Or defense of the 2nd amendment!
They will tax the rich, however.
By rich they mean anyone with a job!
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.