Sunday, September 21, 2008

Yet More Support For The Troops From The Dems

First, I have to give credit to the blog Red County and the Wall Street Journal for this find. I first saw the mention on Twitter by Red County and followed up on it at the WSJ. All quotes from the WSJ.

Citing General Petraeus by name, the resolution, which is sponsored by Independent Democrat Joe Lieberman and Republican Lindsey Graham, "commends and expresses the gratitude to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces for the service, sacrifices, and heroism that made the success of the troop surge in Iraq possible."

The Senators -- allies of John McCain -- had hoped to attach the resolution to a defense bill under consideration this week. But Mr. Reid wouldn't allow it.

This was actually blocked from coming out of the Senate Armed Services Committee by Democratic Chairman Carl Levin at the insistence of Democrat Harry Reid

Keep I mind, this is a resolution, it has no binding legal authority. It’s the Congressional equivalent of a “who did something nice” card like we all see at work or our children see in elementary school. It doesn’t cost money. It simply says “Thank You” to the troops and General Patreaus.

Further, I do not want to accuse these two Dems of being against resolutions, because they are not. A quick search shows that they have both sponsored important resolutions in the past.

Harry Reid Sponsored resolutions to:

Oppose the surge one month after Bush announced it. He even scheduled a rare Saturday debate on it.

In March, 2007, before the surge had a chance to really get going he co-sponsored The Joint Resolution To Transition The Mission In Iraq.

And of course we cannot forget the Asbestos Awareness Day resolution he sponsored, this certainly benefited society.

Carl Levin along with too many anti-war resolutions to list, also sponsored these noteworthy classics:

A resolution urging Canada to end commercial seal hunting.

A resolution honoring the Detroit Red Wings Stanley Cup win in 2008.

So these men will sponsor resolutions to attack the troops, honor a professional hockey team, or fight the twin scurges of American society, seal hunting and asbestos, but cannot allow one to be voted on that supports the troops?

The Democrats though are loathe to give any credit to Bush. They care less about the troops, the war in Iraq, and the greater war on terror than they do about the war on George Bush. Further, acknowledging success with the surge makes it painfully obvious, because it’s not already, that they were flat out dead wrong on the surge. They fought it’s implementation, derided it as folly, predicted that it would fail. Now they are stuck with the bad news that it actually worked, helping assure success and stopping the dying of our troops. This is not good news for the Dems.

Quite frankly, I cannot sum up the Democratic stance any better than the WSJ already has:

The reality is that success in Iraq has confounded the political left, which placed a huge political bet on our defeat. Senator Reid famously declared the war lost in April 2007. Joe Biden introduced a resolution opposing the surge. And Hillary Clinton said the reports of progress in Iraq required "a willing suspension of disbelief." In the Democratic narrative, our troops in Iraq are victims of a lost cause, not heroes. They're allowed to get maimed and killed, but not to succeed.

Thus Democrats are left to argue that success in Iraq is irrelevant because the real fight against al Qaeda is occurring in Afghanistan. Or that the reduced violence in Iraq has resulted not from the troop surge but from the Sunni Awakening and the retreat of the Sadr militias.

That’s pretty much ‘nough said. The only thing I can add is that a generation ago the liberals spit on troops at the airport returning from Vietnam. They have become much more refined and civilized since then, now they let their Congressmen do it from afar.


Mustang said...

But ... have we come to expect any more from socialist democrats? But let's give credit where credit is due: socialists seek to destroy traditional Americana, why shouldn't they also attempt to berate the efforts of our warriors?

You may also note that some Democrats have even introduced resolutions supporting Islamic ideals, while discouraging any mention of Christianity of Judaism. And don't forget that in October 2001, Joe Biden wanted to give a $200 million dollar grant to the Iranians (so that Arabs will know we aren't mad at them).

Semper Fi

da patriot said...

Really not surprising coming from the 'hate America first' crowd. Lyndon Johnson prefered to see thousands of U.S. service men come home in body bags, rather than bomb the North Vietnamese into submission. If they Left had their way, Iraq would have been another Mogadishu style slaughter of U.S. soldiers. These people make me sick.

Z said...

Man, Chuck...terrific post.

There really IS nothing more to add to it. I hope McCain hits HARD on this type of thing during the debates, any chance he gets. (that, along with Mr. #3 on the Freddie Mac gravy train!)

I hope you're feeling better, too.

Chuck said...

Mustang, while researching resolutions by Levin, I ran across several asking for citizenship for people with very Middle Eastern sounding names. This is not surprising because metro Detroit has a lot of Middle Easterners. Further, I must admit, I have no info. It is interesting though that he can offer up resolutions for foreign nationals to gain citizenship but not to support American troops.

Patriot, nothing brings out the lib vote like dead troops.

Z, thanks, it is just a bad cold virus I do believe, of course I will play it up as much as possible with Mrs. RightChuck, cough, cough. lol. If you get a chance, the WSJ article is a good read.

Aurora said...

The Democrats, like leftists all over the world, feel so self-righteous, so justified in their quest to wipe out anyone who disagrees with them, that they can't stand to give one inch, including praise where praise is due. They will never honor our brave warriors. To do so would be a kind of admission that any given foot soldier out there fighting is worth a million of any one of them.

Chuck said...

Thanks, Aurora, I know all of this but it is still stunning that they will do this.

Nancy Swider said...

The real tragedy is that Obama is improving among Troop support and that should be worrying the McCain camp as this should not be happening. As I illustrate today over at my blog, this is a very important week for McCain. He needs to recapture the momentum leading up to the debate. I really think the McCain camp can end it this week if they go on offense.

commoncents said...

Great site you got!

Would you like to do a Link Exchange with our new blog COMMON CENTS where we blog about the issues of the day??

Brooke said...

Even the NYT is starting to admit what the Dems won't!

Bob said...

Obama seems like a typical product of the liberal movement that believed that wars were not worthy of study–unless, like Vietnam, those wars could be spun or presented in a way to make the U.S.A. seem as evil as possible. So it would hardly surprise me if he’d be clueless about the Iraqi war,among others.

MK said...

Treacherous vermin this lot. It's truly and eye opener to see what these cretins really think about those who guarantee their professions and their worthless skins.

Who voted for this Reid fellow anyway, hang your head in shame.

Chuck said...

Nancy, I saw your post, good read. As far as the millitary, this could be a problem. There is a higher percentage of blacks in the millitary than society as a whole. Their loyalties are going to be conflicted between a candidate who clearly will be a better comander in chief and a black candidate. I have thought about this before. Obama gets more money from military members although interestingly McCain has more donors. It will be interesting. The real irony here could be that the Dims have refused to remove roadblocks from enlisted men and women overseas from voting. They could ultimately hurt themselves. Sometimes there is justice in life.

Commoncents, thanks for visiting and yes I would like to exchange links. I added your site to my blogroll.

Brooke, thanks for the link, even this idiots have to tell the truth occasionally. See my new blog tonight.

Bob, just one of many clueless subjects for him, just one of many

MK, if you follow the polls, Reid could be in trouble when it's time to face the music again. A while back he was rediculing Chaney's poll numbers, turns out, his were lower. He's a real brainy one.