More Democratic foreign policy wisdom
As a follow-up to yesterday's post, I'd like to present some more gems of Democratic wisdom on Iraq, courtesy of the Washington Post.
Madeleine Albright: "The American military is both the problem and the solution. They are a magnet [for insurgents] but they're also helping with security," she said, adding that Washington needs to ease Middle East anxieties by declaring it wants no permanent bases in Iraq.Wes Clark: "Everybody wants to talk troops, but everyone knows we can't win this with troops alone," Clark said. The United States needs to make Iraq's neighbors, including Syria and Iran, "part of the solution, not part of the problem."
Richard Holbrooke: "I don't believe in an arbitrary drawdown, whether it's Vietnam or Bosnia or Iraq," said Holbrooke, adding that a departure must be "based on realities on the ground."
No wonder the Dems can't gain any traction despite the growing unpopularity of the war. To quote Reason magazine (no GOP shills, they):
These guys make the Bush admin look like rocket scientists (and not the sort who work for NASA).
Comments
The war was over in a few days.
This is an occupation, not a war. Wars are fought by armed forces.
Oh wait, but according to Neocon though, there is a "War" against Christmas, and a "War" against the Ten Commandments, and a "War" against religion. So in that sense, I suppose they can truthfully say there is exactly the same kind of war going on in Iraq. A war against the Neocon Agenda.
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | December 6, 2005 04:42 PM
You REALLY think Dems "can't gain any traction"??
You HAVE to stop reading non-peer-review sites like Wacko Wingnut Reynolds' and Hewitt's.
Major Quinnipiac Poll out 12/5: LOWEST rating of Bush Presidency, at 40%, like a dozen other polls that have Bush looking for new bottoms every poll cycle.
TIME poll, 12/1: 41%, once again LOWEST of his Presidency
FOX poll, 11/30: 42% approval
Gallup 11/20: 37% approval
Cook 11/20: 41% approval.
The ONLY poll that has him over 42% is Rasmussen right now, and they are known partisan.
And you think DEMOCRATS "can't get traction"?
The tiremarks all over Bush amd Cheney's face say you are mistaken!
Why do Dems need to change tactics now? So we can give Rethugs a chance to attack instead of defend?
All we have to do is let the news from Iraq, the news from the Special Prosecutor, the news from DeLay's Sugarland, from Cunningham, Safavian, Ney, Abramoff, Norquist, Rove, Libby, Tomlinson, Scanlon, Taft, Burns, Cornyn, Doolittle, and many more to come do our work of giving Americans a crystal-clear choice when the time comes.
Posted by: Blue88 | December 6, 2005 06:11 PM
First of all, "partisan" or not, Rasmussen's track record during that last election cycle speaks for itself -- their accuracy was superb.
More importantly, however, you have not cited any examples of Democrats "gaining traction." To respond, as you did, by merely pointing to Bush's low poll numbers (which I ceded in the first place) is to miss the point entirely.
Posted by: Barry | December 6, 2005 06:47 PM
If you think the democrats are not gaining traction, wait until 2006 and check the election results then. I think the best expression of the democrats and the majority of the country is what Howard Dean said yesterday:
"I've seen this before in my life. This is the same situation we had in Vietnam. Everybody then kept saying, 'just another year, just stay the course, we'll have a victory.' Well, we didn't have a victory, and this policy cost the lives of an additional 25,000 troops because we were too stubborn to recognize what was happening."
Posted by: Blue Wind | December 6, 2005 10:06 PM
Well, now, lesseee.
Aside from coming thisclose to taking out an incumbent sitting President in time of war in 2004, we've also won:
The last 3 Governors elected (Gregoire, Corzine, Kaine)
The last Senator elected, Mary Landrieu
We now have a slim majority in the gross number of statehouses across the country
Hackett almost beat Jean Schmidt in the most pro-Bush district in the nation, probably DID beat her except for the typical Ohio Diebold voting machine late-day GOP "surge"
Go take a look at "Little Ricky" Santorum in PA, DeLay in Texas, Harris in Florida, all double digit Dem leads (or better).
Let's see where the Texas redistricting fiasco goes; news right now says Ashcroft illegally quashed opinions from the Justice Department that the entire process was illegal. DeLay's little exercise in Fascism added 5 Rethug Reps to the Republicans' side, took away 5 from the Dem side for a 10-vote swing, half the majority in the House.
I think Dems have had traction for months, they are building momentum weekly, and if things stay the way they have been going, 2006 looks like it's going to be a banner year.
Chairman Dean has had a MAJOR impact on fundraising; every month practically he sets new records for that month and for cumulative.
For the first time, we are in the same ballpark as the GOP's awesome money machine. For the first time we have begun to plan a nationwide campaign like Gillespie, Rove, and Mehlman have fought for decades, for the first time in a LONG while, we have people proud of being Democrats in a progressive, populist, nationwide movement.
Doubt it?
Go look at page views and average length of visit at Atrios, TPM, ThinkProgress, Huffington, Daily KOS, Digby, AmericaBlog, Washington Monthly. It's a huge groundswell, and it's still growing.
Wisht I'd been in Maryland this past weekend when the GOP fatcats had to send the staffers out so they could talk down and dirty GOP politics and scream at each other about whose fault it was about the fine mess they'd all gotten into!
HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
To reiterate, why in the world would any Dem want his party to get locked into a position on Iraq?
Posted by: Blue88 | December 6, 2005 10:28 PM