By Owen Paine on Wednesday June 21, 2006 11:55 AM
Nothing can exceed the New York Times at its best --
in this case a blatant chop job at fearless yuppie John "the Treetrunk" Kerry:
Mr. Kerry has found his resolve. But it has not made his fellow Democrats any happier. They fear the latest evolution of Mr. Kerry's views on Iraq may now complicate their hopes of taking back a majority in Congress in 2006.God, can these donks caper and kick, among themselves, over what's too much or too little of a half measure.
And the bottom line? It's bi-partisan from Bush to Feingold. They're all pointing toward a shared horizon, where uncle maintains a perpetual armed and ready local presence, effective enough to keep that oily, gassy, messy, area behaving decent enough for American and trans-nat interests to see a way through to central Asia.
No one wants 140,000 US troops in Iraq for ever -- so one way or other, one time or other, a big hunk of our kids over there are indeed coming home.
So what's the real beef here? Answer: there isn't any -- its a carnival of contending cads.
Comments (3)
Democrats have spent years quashing the anti-Iraq War movement. They're not about to let all that effort go to waste! After all, Diane Feinstein's hubby has major defense contracts riding on it's continuation! Harrumph!
Posted by AlanSmithee | June 21, 2006 12:16 PM
Posted on June 21, 2006 12:16
Mr. & Mrs. Difi better not burn themselves out before we can get aroud to saving Venezuela and its almost equally recalcitrent neighbors. That's all I can say.
Posted by ms_xeno | June 21, 2006 4:25 PM
Posted on June 21, 2006 16:25
This is very true:
Democrats have spent years quashing the anti-Iraq War movement.
even as late as last year when Cindy Sheehan almost singlehandedly revived it most of the big democratic party blogs (Kos, Atrios) either ignored the huge demonstration on the 24th or openly trashed it.
Then a month after a quarter of a million people came to DC, these same democrats were wondering plaintively why there's no anti-war movement.
What's more, it's possible (remotely possible but possible) that the Republicans would be in favor of getting out of Iraq if they weren't so afraid of being trashed from the right by the Democrats.
One positive result of the McGovern campaign was the way it freed Nixon from having to worry about another 1960 and another Democratic initiative from the right.
If things really do start to fall apart in Iraq, you can bet your ass that the Democrats will be all over this saying 'we could have managed it better'.
Posted by Stanley Rogouski | June 21, 2006 5:45 PM
Posted on June 21, 2006 17:45