Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
The WaPo smacks the Murtha plan
Posted by: McQ on Saturday, February 17, 2007

I have to say I was a bit surprised when I read this:
REP. JOHN MURTHA (D-Pa.) has a message for anyone who spent the week following the House of Representatives' marathon debate on Iraq: You've been distracted by a sideshow. "We have to be careful that people don't think this is the vote," the 74-year-old congressman said of the House's 246-182 decision in favor of a resolution disapproving of President Bush's troop surge. "The real vote will come on the legislation we're putting together." That would be Mr. Murtha's plan to "stop the surge" and "force a redeployment" of U.S. forces from Iraq while ducking the responsibility that should come with such a radical step.
It's all about maintaining political viability and refusing to take responsibility for actually doing their job, if they are as adamant as they claim about stopping the war.

The Post goes on to say the vote in the House yesterday should increase the pressure on the President to ensure that both economic and political progress accompany any military progress. I agree. Any of those, without a full court press with the other two dooms the new strategy to failure.

And I also agree with the Post when they say this:
And both chambers should aggressively conduct oversight hearings aimed at holding the administration to its promise to link continued U.S. troop deployments to Iraqi performance.
Exactly. We all know what the key to victory there is, and it doesn't lie with the US. So by all means, hold the administration's feet to the fire on this point.

But that which I most agree with the Post on (and it's a rare day I find more than a single point of agreement, so mark this day down) is what they say about Murtha and the Democratic leadership:
Mr. Murtha has a different idea. He would stop the surge by crudely hamstringing the ability of military commanders to deploy troops. In an interview carried Thursday by the Web site MoveCongress.org, Mr. Murtha said he would attach language to a war funding bill that would prohibit the redeployment of units that have been at home for less than a year, stop the extension of tours beyond 12 months, and prohibit units from shipping out if they do not train with all of their equipment. His aim, he made clear, is not to improve readiness but to "stop the surge." So why not straightforwardly strip the money out of the appropriations bill — an action Congress is clearly empowered to take — rather than try to micromanage the Army in a way that may be unconstitutional? Because, Mr. Murtha said, it will deflect accusations that he is trying to do what he is trying to do. "What we are saying will be very hard to find fault with," he said.
Murtha's way is the moral coward's way as far as I'm concerned. I know I remarked about this earlier today. But this sort of cowardice infuriates me.

Here we see a strategy in which political viability becomes a greater priority than doing what you should do and is actually in your power to do - that is if you really believe it to be important and in the best interest of the country.

Murtha and others are opting, instead, to be moral cowards by choosing a strategy which hamstrings and hobbles the military to the point they can't function and are bound to fail in Iraq but allows Democrats to duck responsibility for that failure. It is the ultimate in immoral political calculation. All done in a stunningly cynical and calculating way so as to not hurt him or others politically. What happens on the other end, to those left in Iraq to fight with too little equipment, too few troops and no support, is absolutely irrelevant in this sort of calculation.
Mr. Murtha's cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq. He continues to insist that Iraq "would be more stable with us out of there," in spite of the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies that early withdrawal would produce "massive civilian casualties." He says he wants to force the administration to "bulldoze" the Abu Ghraib prison, even though it was emptied of prisoners and turned over to the Iraqi government last year. He wants to "get our troops out of the Green Zone" because "they are living in Saddam Hussein's palace"; could he be unaware that the zone's primary occupants are the Iraqi government and the U.S. Embassy?

It would be nice to believe that Mr. Murtha does not represent the mainstream of the Democratic Party or the thinking of its leadership. Yet when asked about Mr. Murtha's remarks Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered her support. Does Ms. Pelosi really believe that the debate she orchestrated this week was not "the real vote"? If the answer is yes, she is maneuvering her party in a way that can only do it harm.
These people rate nothing but scorn. They should be ashamed of themselves. But it appears they have no shame and aren't above such shennanigans if they believe they'll gain a political advantage without paying a political price.

However, in this case, and if passed into law, cynicism, ignorance and politics combine into a lethal mix. The ramifications, as I've mentioned, could mean dead Soldiers and Marines in Iraq as a direct result of this cowardly strategy.

If that happens not only will this strategy backfire on the Democrats, as the Post notes, but they will most assuredly lose power and be exiled to the political wilderness for decades. And such a consequence would be something which they would have earned through this act of moral cowardice and richly deserve.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Hell, even the WaPo notices that Murtha’s plan is stunningly cynical. Maybe there’s hope for things after all. If the war is so horrible it needs to be ended, then why not end it now? Oh yeah, that would take some political gumption, and the profiles in courage on the left (and the GOP’s white-flag caucus) don’t have any.

Also....if Murtha and the Dems keep pushing, I wonder if Joe Lieberman wouldn’t respond by switching the balance of power in the Senate. He owes very little to the Dems at this point.

Giving Senate control back to the GOP certainly would throw the Dems plans into disarray.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
How sweet would that be - heh. The apoplexy would be, well, really entertaining.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Perhaps Representative Murtha has been reading whatever it is that Dr. Erb reads.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
He continues to insist that Iraq "would be more stable with us out of there," in spite of the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies that early withdrawal would produce "massive civilian casualties."

He’s lying about the intelligence? Hide your irony meters.
 
Written By: Aldo
URL: http://
BTW - Tonight is Tet.

Murtha can call his bill "The 2007 Tet Offensive."
 
Written By: Aldo
URL: http://
BTW - Tonight is Tet.

Murtha can call his bill "The 2007 Tet Offensive."
They might as well.
 
Written By: shasta
URL: http://
I don’t know why you’d be surprised. While they (jusifiably) take shots at the way Bush has been running things, they have been pretty supportive of what Bush is trying to do in Iraq and critical of the Dems who want to pack up and leave.
 
Written By: steve sturm
URL: www.thoughtsonline.blogspot.com
"What we are saying will be very hard to find fault with," he said.
Actually, I’m having absolutely no trouble finding fault with it. His plan to de-fund and obstruct the military’s efforts without legislation is the most nakedly cynical, arrogant, cowardly, and yes, anti-American position I’ve ever heard of from an American politician. That it’s also coming from a former (has the Corps made him officially ex-, yet?) Marine is simply unbelieveable.

Kudos to the Post for printing this, and for pointing out that Murtha is trying to de-fund the war effort without actually going on the record by removing the funds from appropriations bills.
 
Written By: Scott Crawford
URL: http://
Dear Dems: This is AMERICA’S War, not BUSH’S war.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Dear Dems: This is AMERICA’S War, not BUSH’S war.
Dear Shark, this is BUSH’S War of Choice and by choice it is Illegal, Immoral AND Fattening, thanx Da Dems.

 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
So, "Joe", I guess the Democrats who voted for the war don’t count (much less the Republicans), or the UN Security Council who voted unanimously for the war don’t count, or the 60+ million voters who re-elected Bush in ’04 don’t count.

I guess none of that counts for anything in this issue. You don’t hold any claim to this fight. Well, tough sh*t sherlock. Take a good hard look around. Whether you like it or not, it is America’s War. Whether you like it or not our troops are trying their best to right what is an awful situation and all you can do is write "this is BUSH’S War of Choice and by choice it is Illegal, Immoral AND Fattening."

Well, thanks for showing us all here what kind of American you are - Whiney, Stupid and FAT!

By the way - are you in any way related to ERB?
 
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://
It would be nice to believe that Mr. Murtha does not represent the mainstream of the Democratic Party or the thinking of its leadership. Yet when asked about Mr. Murtha’s remarks Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered her support.
And this is exactly why I’ve said repeatedly that this kind of cynical nonsense is exactly at the center of what passes for thinking in the Democratic party of today. Murtha is certainly emblematic of all this, but he’s not the heart of the problem. Let’s face it, people... Murtha would nopt have been re-elected, nor would he be getting the support he is from the Dromocrat leadership, were it not so.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://
Oh *SIGH* SShiell you are humour-impaired aren’t you? What portion of "...AND FATTENING" wasn’t a clue that a joke was being made?

I apologize if my remarks have in any way offended the humourless or humour-challenged....Had i realized that the humuor-challenged were going to be present I would have employed a humour-translator.

What ever you do, please do not read the first two postings on the NASCAR post.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Joe - my aplogies if I missed the "humor" in your remark.
 
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider