Democrats Try To Refocus Message On Iraq After Military Gains
Democrats Refocus Message On Iraq After Military Gains
Well we all knew this was coming. The party of retreat and defeat is trying to change it's position AGAIN!!! Sorry fools, you are the party that said "The War Is Lost", we MUST leave Iraq NOW, and a Victory in Iraq would be very (Bad) for us. You arent going to have it both way's. You retreated, you will be defeated! There is NOTHING you can say that the American people will believe. Here's a *snip* of the Democrats new position!?!?!?!
Democratic leaders in Congress had planned to use August recess to raise the heat on Republicans to break with President Bush on the Iraq war. Instead, Democrats have been forced to recalibrate their own message in the face of recent positive signs on the security front, increasingly focusing their criticisms on what those military gains have not achieved: reconciliation among Iraq's diverse political factions.
And now the Democrats, along with wavering Republicans, will face an advertising blitz from Bush supporters determined to remain on offense. A new pressure group, Freedom's Watch, will unveil a month-long, $15 million television, radio and grass-roots campaign today designed to shore up support for Bush's policies before the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, lays out a White House assessment of the war's progress. The first installment of Petraeus's testimony is scheduled to be delivered before the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees on the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a fact both the administration and congressional Democrats say is simply a scheduling coincidence.
The leading Democratic candidates for the White House have fallen into line with the campaign to praise military progress while excoriating Iraqi leaders for their unwillingness to reach political accommodations that could end the sectarian warfare.
"We've begun to change tactics in Iraq, and in some areas, particularly in Anbar province, it's working," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars on Monday.
"My assessment is that if we put an additional 30,000 of our troops into Baghdad, that's going to quell some of the violence in the short term," Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) echoed in a conference call with reporters Tuesday. "I don't think there's any doubt that as long as U.S. troops are present that they are going to be doing outstanding work."
Advisers to both said theirs were political as well as substantive statements, part of a broader Democratic effort to frame Petraeus's report before it is released next month by preemptively acknowledging some military success in the region. Aides to several Senate Democrats said they expect that to be a recurring theme in the coming weeks, as lawmakers return to hear Petraeus's testimony and to possibly take up a defense authorization bill and related amendments on the war.
Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not a chance! You Democrats will have your retreat-in-defeat remarks and stance's shoved right down your throats!! Those of us that have stood by the Troops and the President through all this never let our Troops nor our Country down. You Democrats are fake as fake can be. We arent going to let you forget how you let down the Troops, The American People, and Our Country!
Also Blogging:
Captain America
Well we all knew this was coming. The party of retreat and defeat is trying to change it's position AGAIN!!! Sorry fools, you are the party that said "The War Is Lost", we MUST leave Iraq NOW, and a Victory in Iraq would be very (Bad) for us. You arent going to have it both way's. You retreated, you will be defeated! There is NOTHING you can say that the American people will believe. Here's a *snip* of the Democrats new position!?!?!?!
Democratic leaders in Congress had planned to use August recess to raise the heat on Republicans to break with President Bush on the Iraq war. Instead, Democrats have been forced to recalibrate their own message in the face of recent positive signs on the security front, increasingly focusing their criticisms on what those military gains have not achieved: reconciliation among Iraq's diverse political factions.
And now the Democrats, along with wavering Republicans, will face an advertising blitz from Bush supporters determined to remain on offense. A new pressure group, Freedom's Watch, will unveil a month-long, $15 million television, radio and grass-roots campaign today designed to shore up support for Bush's policies before the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, lays out a White House assessment of the war's progress. The first installment of Petraeus's testimony is scheduled to be delivered before the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees on the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a fact both the administration and congressional Democrats say is simply a scheduling coincidence.
The leading Democratic candidates for the White House have fallen into line with the campaign to praise military progress while excoriating Iraqi leaders for their unwillingness to reach political accommodations that could end the sectarian warfare.
"We've begun to change tactics in Iraq, and in some areas, particularly in Anbar province, it's working," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars on Monday.
"My assessment is that if we put an additional 30,000 of our troops into Baghdad, that's going to quell some of the violence in the short term," Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) echoed in a conference call with reporters Tuesday. "I don't think there's any doubt that as long as U.S. troops are present that they are going to be doing outstanding work."
Advisers to both said theirs were political as well as substantive statements, part of a broader Democratic effort to frame Petraeus's report before it is released next month by preemptively acknowledging some military success in the region. Aides to several Senate Democrats said they expect that to be a recurring theme in the coming weeks, as lawmakers return to hear Petraeus's testimony and to possibly take up a defense authorization bill and related amendments on the war.
Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not a chance! You Democrats will have your retreat-in-defeat remarks and stance's shoved right down your throats!! Those of us that have stood by the Troops and the President through all this never let our Troops nor our Country down. You Democrats are fake as fake can be. We arent going to let you forget how you let down the Troops, The American People, and Our Country!
Also Blogging:
Captain America
Labels: Two Faced Democrats
posted by Marie's Two Cents | 9:08 AM
8 Comments:
hiya Marie..the Dhimmicrats will never admit that we are making progress in Iraq..no way Jose!
The beauty of this is that it is splitting the Dems in Congress and that it will effect the vote for them in 08.
The, "Blue Dogs, " will be pressured to side with Pelosi , Reid and company while their constituents don't wnt a surrender pull out.
As has always been known good news in Iraq is bad news for the Dems whihc is good news for America!
When push comes to shove you have to ask; who benefits with a loss in Iraq? Let's see;
The Republicans? It pretty much a given if there is a loss in Iraq the Republicans will be blamed and there will be a complete meltdown and the party will have to regroup and choose some new leaders.
The US Military? Well, if the US Military is forced to leave with it's tail between it's legs it will be another generation before anyone wil even consider it an honor to join and serve and they will be bitterly impugned through out the world as losers just like after the democrat surrender in Vietnam.
Al qaeda? it goes with out saying if the US is defeated in Iraq by this ragtag group of Islamist Facist terrorists they will attempt to spread Islam throughout the world with terrorist intimidation and a big win under it's belt to prove their seriousness.
The democrat party? if the terrorists succeed in Iraq the democrats will blame the republicans with the overwhelming support from their willing accomplices in the press. The democrats will claim victory for themselves because America was defeated. That's pretty much the line up.
There is nothing the Democrats say or do that is not based purely on partisan politics.
The frequency with which the lot of them flip-flop according to "prevailing winds" attests to that.
As Ken mentioned in his comment, this particular about-face can only serve to divide the Democrats between their farther left and more reasoning voters, which will be positive for the Republicans in '08.
Add to that the observation making the rounds that one of the Dems' greatest errors this campaign season is that they are putting the bulk of their energy, as they have all along, into campaigning against Bush, who can't and won't be running for President this time out.
Let 'em keep it up, in the world of politics today's Democrats are their own worst enemy.
the vision of democrats turning on each other is one I savor. Can you see Pelsio melting down on the floor chastizing the Dempcrats for the lack of support. The troops of Code Pink and MoveOn advancing on their offices wanting to cash the checks of election in 08. Never has such an ugly picture appeared so beautiful
In the end, the dumbs...oops, my bad, I meant the dems will end up looking wishy washy and that will be their downfall. Which will suit me just fine! :-)
Hi Marie,
Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Calif.), an Armed Services Committee member who is close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said many of her colleagues learned a hard lesson from the Republican campaign. Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher said I don't know of anybody who isn't desperately supportive of the military What a bunch of Hypocrites but of course that is what the Liberals have always been.
TLLTCT Said it correctly, As has always been known good news in Iraq is bad news for the Dems whihc is good news for America!
I cant wait to vote all these Democrats OUT of office.
I cant stand any of them except for Joe Lieberman.
Post a Comment
<< Home