Posted on 01/17/2007 7:00:03 PM PST by NormsRevenge
It would be helpful, I believe, if reflexive Bush bashers took a time out, caught their collective breath and considered the consequences of some of their actions and positions. Sure, I know that they are exercising their constitutional right as Americans to criticize their president and any other elected official with whom they disagree whether their criticism is based upon fact and logic, blind emotion or, as is commonly the case today, just visceral hatred of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and all who support them.
It’s time for us as a nation to decide whether or not we are really a nation at war or just a nation at war with itself. By war, I mean the real kind, fought by real soldiers who are dedicated to achieving a mission, not the make-believe, civilian kind such as the war on drugs or the war on poverty.
If we really are at war, then we should endeavor to rally behind the troops who are fighting it and the wartime president who is their commander-in-chief. That’s the American way, isn’t it? It doesn’t mean you have to agree with the war or love the president. Feel free to vote against his party whenever you get the chance but meanwhile, at the very least, refrain from saying or doing things that weaken the nation’s image, harm morale of the troops or provide comfort and encouragement to the enemy.
Egregious examples of the latter include demonstrations demanding return of the troops now and threats by Congressional Democrats to deny funding for military operations deemed necessary by the wartime commander-in-chief. Lesser examples include the unremitting condemnation of the president’s plan for a last ditch military effort to salvage something out of the Iraq fiasco without offering an alternative plan which the president has said time and again he would consider. By alternate plan, though, I mean something more substantive than recommending that we consult with our enemies in the region, Iran and Syria, both of whom are sponsors of terrorism which we are supposed to be at war against. Why on earth would we do that, knowing how they feel about us?
The anti-war protests are starting up again and nothing good for America will come from them. Protestors may truly feel that they are acting in America’s best interests but here’s a reality check. Ask any active duty soldier or marine who has seen combat in Iraq or Afghanistan how the anti-war demonstrations back home affect troops in combat. They are at best disturbing and unsettling to the troops and at worse, downright harmful to morale. The troops are, for the most part, too dedicated and disciplined to complain or to let it affect their performance but everyone I’ve asked has told me that it is important to know that the folks back home support them. Supporting them, however, entails more than just saying the words. It includes supporting the mission that they are putting their lives on the line for.
I’m certainly not going to bet the farm on the prospects for the president’s latest plan to succeed. Our troops will, of course, do everything in their power to achieve some manner of success in this so far mismanaged war. They deserve solid support from the home front and restraint from the Bush bashers while their lives are on the line. In the final analysis, though, success depends on the Iraqis themselves and their performance to date gives little cause for optimism. I personally have little confidence in their ability to put aside religious and tribal hatreds long enough to salvage their country.
Given the low regard that large numbers of Iraqis seem to have for Americans, it has become a matter some indifference to me and probably to most Americans whether Iraqis live happier ever after or whether they go on killing one another after we leave. I am far more concerned with the safety of our troops and with American interests in the area. A precipitous withdrawal, such as advocated by some, including Sen. John Edwards, Sen. Edward Kennedy and Rep. John Murtha, would be inimical to both concerns and any attempt to deny funding for wartime military operations would be an outrageous infringement of a wartime president’s authority.
You noticed that, too?
A "lame duck" is a politician whose successor has already been elected, like Buchanan in 1860. That's why the 20th Amendment is called the "Lame Duck" Amendment.
The only people with brown thumbs in Washington are Senators who are too cowardly to either support the war or cut off funds and instead want to pass a nonbinding pouty lip resolution. That's about as lame as it gets. Meanwhile, the President will STILL be POTUS for two more years, trying to win a war that his political enemies would prefer to lose so they can make a political profit.
And in any case, even if the President had his thumb up his butt that's not as bad as his detractors on the HILL, in the MSM and even here who have their cranium's up their own rears.
Yep.
LOL.....you are SO right.
You know, you are part of the problem; you have done nothing but bitch about George Bush since you got here.
Still playing in grade school? Name calling... Such a DU way to act.
Of course it is! You are a raving lunatic who even thinks of illegal immigration while unloading groceries! /joking
By saying we, I was just speaking of our user base in general. Not anyone specifically. I really think it's bad thing for FR, or any other discussion forum when you have a significant amount of people trolling and hijacking threads. I think the mods, should start nuking totally out of topic posts when they are so far off topic they amount to hijacking.
Didn't I understand Rockwell to be libertarian?
Is Libertarian now considered "right wing"?
And what's wrong with being right wing? :)
Thanks. It's nice to know that I have so much power.
No more calls, ladies and gentlemen; we have a winner!
Naw just bitch and moaning is trait of a DUer...
I couldn't agree more.
I just watched and listened to one of my favorites, Newt Gingrich, on Greta Von Sustern.
Unless we, all of us, can come to the table to have a real dialog on the greatest challenges that face this Republic, in Newt's words, since the Civil War, we are doomed.
There is more than enough "blame" to go around for the why's and how's we got to where we are.
It is time for a "real leader" to step forward and it is then time for us, as a republic, to come together and lend a shoulder to "Get er done!"
I must be honest, though, I think and with no great pleasure, that the Republic has passed the Rubicon in that regard.
The politics of divide and win, at any cost, has unfortunately put us and our children, and grand children in the position of being just another "Banana Republic". We will never stop bickering and fighting with each other to effectively fight the powers from without that want to see us defeated and our ideals of personal responsibility and opportunity driven into the junk heap of history.
It is quite, for lack of a better word, devastating to me to watch the demise of our once great Republic take place.
P.S. Norm. Just sit back and watch someone flame out Mr. Gingrich and his ideas before this thread dies.
Thanks for the post.
Greg Adams
Brownsville, TX
On the Other Front Line
First time I've had a post clobbered by the admin, that I'm aware of. Except for one I thought better of and asked to be pulled.
--
Consider yourself 'collateral damage'. ;-)
There are no shortage of issues that folks have very hardened opinions on here at FR.
I guess I should have posted a Be Nice admonishment at the start of the thread, it has worked fairly well in the past.
I said you were a PART; but the rest of us have to scroll past your SCREED day in and day out.
You must be miserable in real life; the world is falling down around us and yet here you are, STILL bitching about George Bush.
Well stated!! Try and think of another person in the country that would have done a better job than Bush. There hasn't been any time during his presidency that has been easy. Fighting terror worldwide, not just in Iraq and Afghanistan, but on many fronts. Also, has managed the economy very well. Who could have done better?
What I meant was that even trying to get rid of Rino's was trashed here on FR. The idea that getting rid of a Rino was bad because it would give the dems a victory. Many of us were trashed because we wanted conservatives and not Rinos.
LOL --- you've mistaken power for annoyance.
Exactly, Bush lays down with dogs like McLame and ends up with flees. Somehow conservatives are always to blame.
Oh. OK never mind. One of those.
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.