Posted on 05/09/2007 4:09:48 AM PDT by Kaslin
The Extent of Rudy's Woes Updated: 4:12 PM 05/08/07 United Warrior Survivors Foundation Annual Golf Tournament Updated: 4:09 PM 05/08/07 September May Be the Cruelest Month By Tony Blankley Wednesday, May 9, 2007
The political and policy planets are beginning to come into ominous alignment over Iraq and Washington. As electoral prospects for Republicans in 2008 continue to grow darker, the urge of GOP congressmen and senators to break with the president over the war will only grow stronger.
As I have been saying for months -- and as Sen. Trent Lott said publicly earlier this week -- September will be the month of reckoning. And that reckoning may wreck the world's chance to stave off a Middle East disaster that will probably follow a premature American exit from Iraq.
(Regretfully, Gen. Petraeus has said that he will know by then whether things are turning around -- although his own counter-insurgency writings recognize that successful counter-insurgency is measured in years, not months. September also follows the August congressional break, when congressmen will get an earful on Iraq from their voters. September is also the month when the new fiscal year's military budget gets voted on.)
No even middling student of history can be anything less than appalled at how often mankind lurches into its episodic catastrophes due to momentary lapses of common sense shared by vast majorities.
In 1914, from London to Paris to Berlin to Vienna to St. Petersburg and Moscow, most people briefly thought that World War I would be over and won by Christmas. In retrospect, the known close balance of lethality held by the two belligerent alliances (and the advantage the machine gun gave to the defense) should have led people to presume a long and bloody abattoir of a war.
In the 1930s, the idea that the manifest expansive urges of the Japanese Empire and Hitler's Germany would somehow be self-limiting should never have become the consensus expectation both in Europe and the United States.
But when the people abandon common sense for wishful thinking, they are not likely to be led back to safety by their leaders. (And it is the people who pay the price in blood. The leaders rarely die with their boots on.) Cynical or foolish politicians will reflexively give the people what they want. Even most sincere and thoughtful politicians will rarely find the strength to long resist the urge of the public. Vox Populi, Vox Dei -- (although sometimes politicians should listen to the advice given to Charlemagne by his advisor, Alcuin: "And those people should not be listened to who keep saying the voice of the people is the voice of God, since the riotousness of the crowd is always very close to madness.")
But whether riotous or not, the popular will is hard to resist. That is why this week's Newsweek polling data is so ominous for prospects in Iraq. Putting aside the poll's measure of President Bush's approval (28 percent -- 4 to 6 points lower than most other polls currently measure), it is the notional head-to-head polls between leading Republican and Democratic presidential candidates that will strike fear into Republican hearts.
Where, a few months ago, Giulliani beat (by 5-10 percent) and McCain beat or tied all Democratic comers, in this week's poll, Giuliani loses to Clinton by 3 percent, to Edwards by 6 percent and to Obama by 7 percent. (For a net negative turn around of 10-15 percent for Giuliani). McCain loses worse, respectively, by 6 percent, 10 percent and 13 percent.
As neither the Democratic nor Republican candidates' campaigns (nor their parties' general efforts) have been strikingly strong or weak in the last month, what these shocking shifts demonstrate is the virtual collapse of the Republican brand appeal in the face of the continuing bad news from Iraq.
Unless the numbers shift back by September, Republican congressmen will naturally assume that they are looking at the prospect of a 2008 electoral drubbing along the lines of post-Watergate 1974 or Goldwater 1964 (let us pray they don't add to that list Hoover 1932).
Assuming continuing bad news and bad polling in September, enough Republicans may well support the Democrats' inevitable "out by the spring" military appropriation to allow for a successful override of the president's certain veto. Then the president may try to challenge congressional authority in court (perhaps relying on the 1861 Food and Forage Act, if Congress doesn't exempt their cut-off from that law, which permits an army to stay in the field without appropriated monies.)
Perhaps the president will win in court. Perhaps things will be seen to be getting much better in Iraq. Perhaps fewer Republicans will cross the aisle, and instead stick with their commitment to our national security requirements. Perhaps the Democrats will so grossly demonstrate their unfitness for national leadership that they lose electoral credibility (although their growing electoral strength in the face of their already clearly grotesque irresponsibility makes one wonder what more they could do that might, finally, appall the public.) But a betting man wouldn't count on it.
This year, September looks to be the cruelest month.
Tony Blankley served as press secretary to then Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich. He is the author of The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations? .
Be the first to read Tony Blankley's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
©Creators Syndicate September May Be the Cruelest Month By Tony Blankley Wednesday, May 9, 2007 Send an email to Tony Blankley Email It Print It Take Action Read Article & Comments (3) Trackbacks Post Your Comments
The political and policy planets are beginning to come into ominous alignment over Iraq and Washington. As electoral prospects for Republicans in 2008 continue to grow darker, the urge of GOP congressmen and senators to break with the president over the war will only grow stronger.
As I have been saying for months -- and as Sen. Trent Lott said publicly earlier this week -- September will be the month of reckoning. And that reckoning may wreck the world's chance to stave off a Middle East disaster that will probably follow a premature American exit from Iraq.
(Regretfully, Gen. Petraeus has said that he will know by then whether things are turning around -- although his own counter-insurgency writings recognize that successful counter-insurgency is measured in years, not months. September also follows the August congressional break, when congressmen will get an earful on Iraq from their voters. September is also the month when the new fiscal year's military budget gets voted on.)
No even middling student of history can be anything less than appalled at how often mankind lurches into its episodic catastrophes due to momentary lapses of common sense shared by vast majorities.
In 1914, from London to Paris to Berlin to Vienna to St. Petersburg and Moscow, most people briefly thought that World War I would be over and won by Christmas. In retrospect, the known close balance of lethality held by the two belligerent alliances (and the advantage the machine gun gave to the defense) should have led people to presume a long and bloody abattoir of a war.
In the 1930s, the idea that the manifest expansive urges of the Japanese Empire and Hitler's Germany would somehow be self-limiting should never have become the consensus expectation both in Europe and the United States.
But when the people abandon common sense for wishful thinking, they are not likely to be led back to safety by their leaders. (And it is the people who pay the price in blood. The leaders rarely die with their boots on.) Cynical or foolish politicians will reflexively give the people what they want. Even most sincere and thoughtful politicians will rarely find the strength to long resist the urge of the public. Vox Populi, Vox Dei -- (although sometimes politicians should listen to the advice given to Charlemagne by his advisor, Alcuin: "And those people should not be listened to who keep saying the voice of the people is the voice of God, since the riotousness of the crowd is always very close to madness.")
But whether riotous or not, the popular will is hard to resist. That is why this week's Newsweek polling data is so ominous for prospects in Iraq. Putting aside the poll's measure of President Bush's approval (28 percent -- 4 to 6 points lower than most other polls currently measure), it is the notional head-to-head polls between leading Republican and Democratic presidential candidates that will strike fear into Republican hearts.
Where, a few months ago, Giulliani beat (by 5-10 percent) and McCain beat or tied all Democratic comers, in this week's poll, Giuliani loses to Clinton by 3 percent, to Edwards by 6 percent and to Obama by 7 percent. (For a net negative turn around of 10-15 percent for Giuliani). McCain loses worse, respectively, by 6 percent, 10 percent and 13 percent.
As neither the Democratic nor Republican candidates' campaigns (nor their parties' general efforts) have been strikingly strong or weak in the last month, what these shocking shifts demonstrate is the virtual collapse of the Republican brand appeal in the face of the continuing bad news from Iraq.
Unless the numbers shift back by September, Republican congressmen will naturally assume that they are looking at the prospect of a 2008 electoral drubbing along the lines of post-Watergate 1974 or Goldwater 1964 (let us pray they don't add to that list Hoover 1932).
Assuming continuing bad news and bad polling in September, enough Republicans may well support the Democrats' inevitable "out by the spring" military appropriation to allow for a successful override of the president's certain veto. Then the president may try to challenge congressional authority in court (perhaps relying on the 1861 Food and Forage Act, if Congress doesn't exempt their cut-off from that law, which permits an army to stay in the field without appropriated monies.)
Perhaps the president will win in court. Perhaps things will be seen to be getting much better in Iraq. Perhaps fewer Republicans will cross the aisle, and instead stick with their commitment to our national security requirements. Perhaps the Democrats will so grossly demonstrate their unfitness for national leadership that they lose electoral credibility (although their growing electoral strength in the face of their already clearly grotesque irresponsibility makes one wonder what more they could do that might, finally, appall the public.) But a betting man wouldn't count on it.
This year, September looks to be the cruelest month.
Tony Blankley served as press secretary to then Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich. He is the author of The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations? .
Inside the Beltway bilge. Probably the only thing accurate is his assessment that GOP congressmen lack cojones to do the right thing.
Failure to fight. By that I mean to the utmost, both abroad but at home. Home is the only place the war can be lost, BTW.
That’s when the Raiders start losing, right?
Mobs have never been known for rational discernment. But to imply that the people will find hope in a screeching witch who is disliked by a majority of Americans is really stretching it, Tony. Much like Republicans, many rats look at their choice of feeble candidates and see that their toast is not buttered or tasty.
Besides, the election season is young. If Tony wants to run around waving his arms and panicking, he should join a fire department.
Tony’s turning slowly into jello. Someone needs to head butt him right in the sternum.
An ugly, brutal and costly struggle, possibly over decades... but imperative given the alternative available to free people and responsible leaders worldwide.
Why does the MSM persist in looking at EVERY setback and EVERY disappointment as a bolt from the blue and the last nail in the coffin???? If the MSM cannot think or see past their own noses, then what good are they to us? I pulled the plug on them a long time ago and for a good reason!!
Is that a trick question?
You would think Tony would check the internals before basing his essay on a Newsweek poll. Coming tomorrow, more Korans flushed in Guantanamo toilets.
Good analysis.
We have until September to prove that things are getting “better” in Iraq or set up a time table to leave. If neither of those happens, the GOP is going to loose it all in 2008.
I think Tony's analysis is sound. Regardless of how good or bad things in Iraq are going, if the public perception (driven mostly by the mainstream media) is that things are going bad, GOP congressmen and senators will be deserting the President in droves to try to save their own skins. This is why the President's inarticulateness at presenting his case is so critical. This administration sucks more at PR than any in recent memory.
It is a good analysis. Those who dismiss it are foolish.
Hoover actually did better in 1932 than Goldwater in 1964 both in terms of electoral votes and in terms of percentage of the popular vote (although just barely).
“In the 1930s, the idea that the manifest expansive urges of the Japanese Empire and Hitler’s Germany would somehow be self-limiting should never have become the consensus expectation both in Europe and the United States.
But when the people abandon common sense for wishful thinking, they are not likely to be led back to safety by their leaders. (And it is the people who pay the price in blood. The leaders rarely die with their boots on.)”
Typical liberalism hiding behind ‘thoughtfulness’.
I wonder if the author can recall what happened to the ‘leaders’ of Germany and Japan in the wake of losing the war they brought about.
Pretty sure they either killed themselves, were tried and hung, or hunted down if they escaped. The only exception was Japan’s Emperor, who was deballed and left in place as a walk advertisement warning of the danger of applying God like stature to a human being.
Usually Blankley is stalwart. This column shows that he's slipping.
The cows have come home to roost, and it's not a pretty sight.
It's true that the Army and Marines have have grown somewhat, but that has been at the expense of the Navy (about 40,000 sailors cut) and the Air Force (about 35,000 cut), which have also provided a whole bunch of "boots on the ground", again at the expense of their primary missions of putting ships to sea and airplanes in the air.
War is an expensive business, Billy Jeff loathed the military and had other things to spend the money on, like buying votes. Country Club Republicans have rarely been too keen on spending money, and they made little distinction between military spending,although the Constitution grants the federal government the exclusive power to raise and support armies and to provide and maintain a Navy, and "social spending", for which there is no Constitutional justification or authority. They're just Cheap.
So, the solution is..............................
Don't elect Dems or Country Club Republicans. But that's a tough row to hoe.
Sadly, it will take a major military defeat to wake up the Sheeple, by then it might be too late. We no longer have the insulation that we had back in the pre- WW-II era when our defense spending was as low as a fraction of GDP as it got in the 2001 budget year.
Someone near my location as I type, I wouldn't be surprised if was the 3rd ACR, is spending some of what money we do have for training, and it's not the rattle of M-16 fire, the rhythmic thumping of Ma Deuce or the Bushmaster cannon. It's a sporadic Boom, that rattles the windows and sometimes can actually be felt, *inside* a 2 y/o house that's got to be at least 7 or 8 miles, likely farther, away from the range areas. It's got to be either 120mm smooth bore cannon (M1 Abrams tank) or 155 mm howitzer.
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.