December 7, 2005
IF DEMOCRATS DISAGREE WHY DOES HE STILL HAVE THAT JOB?:
Bush Criticizes Dean for Iraq War Remarks: GOP leaders take aim at the Democratic Party chairman after he says the idea the U.S. will win is 'just plain wrong.' (Edwin Chen, December 7, 2005, LA Times)
"Oh, there's pessimists, you know, and politicians who try to score points," the president replied. "Our troops need to know that the American people stand with them, and we have a strategy for victory."
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) also weighed in, saying Dean had "made it clear the Democratic Party sides with those who wish to surrender."
And Ken Mehlman, the Republican Party chairman, told the San Antonio radio station Tuesday: "I can't remember any time in history where the leader of a national party, one of our two national parties, predicted that America would lose a war we were engaged in. I think it sends the wrong message to our troops, the wrong message to the enemy, the wrong message to the Iraqi people."
Karen Finney, the Democratic National Committee's communications director, said that Dean's comments had been taken out of context.
The context being that only fellow Leftists were supposed to be listening? After three years on the national stage how can you still not be ready for primetime but keep your job?
Posted by Orrin Judd at December 7, 2005 12:37 PM
Like VD, Dr. Dean truly is "the gift that keeps on giving".
I assume the thinking among those Democrats still capable of long-range rational thought is that no one but political junkies are paying attention to what Howard's saying right now, the big media outlets are never going to make his remarks more than a half-day story no matter how outrageous they are, and when the time comes to campaign in the 2008 election the other party leaders can lock him in a closet, they way the more radical party members were slienced going into the 1992 election.
Because his real job is (and has been from the git-go) to make Hillary look like a patriotic centrist.
John - true but the great thing about today's technology and the blogs is that comments like this can be brought back for use in the '06 and '08 campaigns.
This seemed as good as post as any to put this, but this professor must have been reading my posts on this blog.
Stuntz - New Republic
"Thankfully, Lincoln saw to it that the war's purpose changed. George W. Bush has changed the purpose of his war too, though the change seems more the product of our enemies' choices than of Bush's design.
By prolonging the war, Zarqawi and his Baathist allies have drawn thousands of terrorist wannabes into the fight--against both our soldiers and Muslim civilians. When terrorists fight American civilians, as on September 11, they can leverage their own deaths to kill a great many of us. But when terrorists fight American soldiers, the odds tilt towards our side.
Equally important, by bringing the fight to a Muslim land, by making that land the central front of the war on Islamic terrorism, the United States has effectively forced Muslim terrorists to kill Muslim civilians. That is why the so-called Arab street is rising--not against us but against the terrorists, as we saw in Jordan after Zarqawi's disastrous hotel bombing.
The population of the Islamic world is choosing sides not between jihadists and Westerners, but between jihadists and people just like themselves. We are, slowly but surely, converting bin Laden's war into a civil war--and that is a war bin Laden and his followers cannot hope to win.
The only thing wrong above is that is WAS by design. That is why we stayed as long as we did.