Spring Break
The Democrats Are Selling Us Out In Iraq
Rob Casapulla
Issue date: 9/7/07 Section: Commentary
According to news reports, Osama Bin Laden is set to release a televised statement in the upcoming days. When the video airs, it will be the first time the world sees the terrorist in three years. In upcoming days General David Petraeus is supposed to testify before Congress about the status of the Iraq War. Thursday, leading Democrats took a break from chastising Republicans about being intolerant, to speak out against Petraeus's report.
I thought Democrats were the ones that were against pre-emptive attacks. Aren't these the people that tell us to wait for all the evidence to come out before we rush to any conclusions? After all, these are the people that say we shouldn't have gone into Iraq when both United States and international intelligence showed that Saddam Hussein was amassing weapons of mass destruction.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, along with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, have all cutely referred to the report that Petraeus is due to give as the "Bush report." This is their way of intelligently portraying the fact that they believe Petraeus to be Bush's lapdog and say whatever the president tells him to say.
Pelosi believes that progress may have been made in one or two areas but in the majority of Iraq is in turmoil. Is it me or does she have this all backwards? Every report that comes in from Iraq says that the majority of the country has been secured and the violence is rampant in a few isolated parts of the country. But apparently this is beside the point.
Even if Petraeus is Bush's lapdog and is going to tell Congress exactly what Bush wants them to hear, let's look at a what some other people have been saying about the troop surge and the status in Iraq just in the past month.
On Aug. 20 Hillary Clinton, clearly an avid Bush supporter, said "the surge is working," then went on to praise progress in Iraq. Since then, of course, the Senator has moved on to gin up the leftist base by saying she would still bring home the troops if she takes the White House in 2008.
I thought Democrats were the ones that were against pre-emptive attacks. Aren't these the people that tell us to wait for all the evidence to come out before we rush to any conclusions? After all, these are the people that say we shouldn't have gone into Iraq when both United States and international intelligence showed that Saddam Hussein was amassing weapons of mass destruction.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, along with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, have all cutely referred to the report that Petraeus is due to give as the "Bush report." This is their way of intelligently portraying the fact that they believe Petraeus to be Bush's lapdog and say whatever the president tells him to say.
Pelosi believes that progress may have been made in one or two areas but in the majority of Iraq is in turmoil. Is it me or does she have this all backwards? Every report that comes in from Iraq says that the majority of the country has been secured and the violence is rampant in a few isolated parts of the country. But apparently this is beside the point.
Even if Petraeus is Bush's lapdog and is going to tell Congress exactly what Bush wants them to hear, let's look at a what some other people have been saying about the troop surge and the status in Iraq just in the past month.
On Aug. 20 Hillary Clinton, clearly an avid Bush supporter, said "the surge is working," then went on to praise progress in Iraq. Since then, of course, the Senator has moved on to gin up the leftist base by saying she would still bring home the troops if she takes the White House in 2008.
Viewing Comments 1 - 6 of 7
JerryC
posted 9/07/07 @ 6:32 AM EST
For several semesters, Casapulla has made it emminently clear that he loves the Iraq war. Yet I do not see his byline listed as Baghdad.
I am sure that Casapulla's priorities, ala Cheney, are just more important than actually fighting in the war he loves so much. (Continued…)
Rob
posted 9/07/07 @ 7:48 AM EST
It sounds like the same rightest retoric. Democrats can be strong Defense and maintain and anti-Iraq War position. That being said both parties remaiin divided among the war in general. (Continued…)
Sarah
posted 9/07/07 @ 10:54 AM EST
Stop saying democrats root against America, it is the most ridiculous statement people use because it makes no sense. Just because democrats think the opposite of what republicans think doesn't mean that they hate America. (Continued…)
Jacob
posted 9/07/07 @ 4:56 PM EST
Hey Rob,
I hope you're not a journalism major, or for that matter, a history major. First, Bin Laden isn't Iraq. I'm not even going to start with this. (Continued…)
berna
posted 9/07/07 @ 7:14 PM EST
Rob: I agree with the comments above but not yours; get your facts straight before shooting from the hip or is it the lip. Why insist on making this a 'right vs. (Continued…)
berna123
berna
posted 9/07/07 @ 7:27 PM EST
Rob: I disagree with all of your comments. You need to get your facts straight as suggested by other comments before shooting from the hip or is it the lip. (Continued…)
Post a Comment