Bush the Uniter: 403 to 3 Against Withdrawing Troops

"A disgrace," said Nancy Pelosi, referring to the Republican "stunt" (well, okay-- just stunt) to put the resolution to a vote.

No, Nancy. The disgrace is that your caucus offers proposals like this in an unserious way, merely to damage the President and undermine the effort to win this war, without any real desire to vote in favor of them.

The Democrats say this was a sham proposal, because Murtha didn't call for the "immediate" termination of operations in Iraq. Well, actually, he used exactly that word in press conferences. In his actual resolution (or bill?), he used the language "at the earliest practicable date," but that's dogfood. Bush also wants to get out "at the earliest practicable date," consistent with victory, a clause missing from Murtha's Cut and Run Bill.

I want to get out "at the earliest practicable date." So, I would imagine, does every poster here. To paraphrase Bill Clinton, it all depends on what "practicable" practices. "Practicable," as far as victory, or "practicable," as far as a simple matter of the logistics necessary to safely bug out? (And on that point: Do the Democrats really imagine the Republican proposal imagined the unsafe evacuation of our troops?)

Murtha's proposal seeks to obscure what exactly he means, and he shouldn't be allowed to do so. The American people have a right to know precisely what a proposal means, even if the antiwar left would prefer to keep such trifling details vague.

Still, the GOP might have done a better job of making this resolution more closely track with Murtha's, by specifiying what Murtha left deliberately left out -- "at the earliest practicable date, regardless of whether or not victory has been achieved, and regardless of of whether or not Iraq will be immediately destabilized by the withdrawal and descend into civil war and state-sponsored terrorism." That's what the Murtha bill means, even if it is politic enough not to actually say so.

The Democrats are complaining that this resolution, with its direct and blunt language about "immediate termination," does not fairly reflect the substance of the Murtha proposal. Bullshit. It represents the meaning of the proposal perfectly; it's just not phrased in disingenuous, obscurant language.

Thanks for the "Bush the Uniter" headline to an anonymous poster.

You anonymous guys really should post under a name, even a false one, just so everyone can get to know you. Even if you post as "Fartsy McStinkers," at least having a name will allow everyone to get to know the Fartsy McStinkers doctrine.

Update: Chirac sends "surrender specialists," also known as French generals, to assist the Democrats in their brave initiative to cowardly cut and run.

Not really. But the Democrats and French are so closely aligned on this -- we cannot afford an American victory; true courage is displayed by rank cowardice -- that we might as well make it official. Republicans represent the interests of big American corporations; Democrats represent the interests of big French corporations.

posted by Ace at 09:16 AM

| Access Comments