Democrats Position On Iraq Confusing Voters

As the Bush administration continues to go forward with the Battle in Iraq, and as the troop surge continues to show progress, the Democrats are stuck redefining their positions…

For sometime now the Democrats have been using the debate theme “bringing our troops home.” So why the change now? Why is Clinton, Edwards, Obama, Biden and the majority of leading Democrats now are saying that they will not necessarily “bring the troops home.”

Is it because the Democratic front runners recognize that we cannot just walk away? Is it because the surge is starting to improve the security situation? Who knows, but isn’t funny how obvious it is that Democrats govern by the polls? If there is any slight change in public opinion, the Democrats try to get in front of it and pretend they were pushing the same thought all along. It seems to me that they are preparing for Gen. Petreaus’ report in September…

What happen to the anti-war candidate, John Edwards? Didn’t he apologize for voting for the war by saying “it was a mistake?” Didn’t Mr. anti-war say that he would get all the troops home if he were elected. Well as predicted, let the dancing begin… This is a quote from John Edwards in the Democratic debate in Chicago last week: “We’ve got to be prepared to control a civil war if it starts to spill outside the borders of Iraq, and we have to be prepared for the worst possibility that you never hear anyone talking about, which is the possibility that genocide breaks out and the Shi’a try to systematically eliminate the Sunni. As president of the United States, I would plan and prepare for all those possibilities.”

Now, I don’t know what rock Edwards has been living under for the past year, but almost all Republicans have said time and time again, that if we withdrawal prematurely, then we could witness possible genocide. Nice try pretty boy, but that bandwagon has already departed!

What about her thighness, Hillary Clinton? One of her famous quotes during these debates is “If this president does not end this war before he leaves office, when I am president, I will.” Remember that? However, Billary now is starting to side step (once again) her previous position. Just recently, Clinton said that there were “remaining vital national security interests in Iraq that would require a continuing deployment of American troops. The United States’ security, would be undermined if part of Iraq turned into a failed state that serves as a Petri dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda.” Hmmm, so now she will continue with troop deployments? Doesn’t sound like she’s going to bring the troops home anytime soon. Another lie from her thighness!

But wait, there’s more… Back in February, Billary was extremely vocal in making “bringing the troops home” her battle cry for President. Clinton said if she were elected this would be her “simple” message to the government of Iraq… Clinton: “I would say ‘I’m sorry, it’s over. We are not going to baby-sit a civil war.” So which position are we to believe? My answer is none of the above, you can’t trust a habitual liar. I should know, she was the First Lady of my home state for many years… Don’t let her fool you!

Oh, and let’s not leave out Mr. I wouldn’t have voted for the war if I was a Senator at the time, Obama… That has been his whole campaign, but now Mr. Foreign Policy says that he would leave a military presence (which he will not say how many) to provide security for American personnel, fight terrorism and train Iraqis. Two questions for the Foreign Policy expert: If you are going to “bring the troops home” then why do you need security for American personnel? And finally Junior Senator, do you think our troops over-there are playing ring-around-the-rosie? We are fighting terrorism, we are training the Iraqi military, so what is so different about your grand plan? That’s right, you want to “re-deploy” and wait until genocide takes place, then you will send more troops back in…

Isn’t obvious to you that the Democrats are trying to stay ahead of public opinion? Isn’t obvious that the only difference with the current Democratic plan for Iraq and our current operations is that the Dems will move some troops into a different region and wait until all hell breaks loose, then we’ll just have to go back in and start all over. Compare that with what the Bush administration is doing… Instead of “re-deploying”, we are standing our ground, so that we won’t have to start all over and face an even worse situation. That’s the difference!

So here’s the choices… Democrats: Re-deploy some troops outside the region (not bring them home), keep some troops in Iraq (making a smaller number of troops in Iraq easier to defeat) and then send more troops back in when genocide starts up. Or…

Republicans: Maintain current troop levels and keep pushing forward in the hopes of achieving stability in Iraq.

No matter which one you choose, just remember that the troops will not actually come home until the mission is completed. Don’t let the “re-deployment” spin fool you, our troops will continue to rotate out, and will continue to deploy to the region. So if they’re going to keep sending our troops over-there, then don’t you think that it’s more reasonable to stay in the fight, preventing any kind of genocide and moving closer to stability, or should we just stand by and wait until enough Iraqis have been killed before we go back in and re-start from the beginning?

But I’m sure the Democrats will soon change their position again, then we’ll have even more great options to choose from. Either that or the Dems will do whatever they can to dilute any good news from Gen. Petreaus, lying to the public once again…

blog radio

Advertisements

~ by bohography on August 13, 2007.

One Response to “Democrats Position On Iraq Confusing Voters”

  1. Of the top Democratic candidates Richardson has the only crystal clear, unambiguous approach that most Democrats favor – a total withdraw of our forces. Richardson understands the path the U.S. must take to get out of Iraq, and possesses the diplomatic experience to see that our withdrawal does not lead to further chaos in the region.

    Senators Clinton, Obama and Edwards don’t have the confidence in their own judgment to follow the will of the American people. Their withdrawal will be a long and slow march. The intervention will continue for years to come if one of them is elected President. I wrote a diary on this topic last month: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/4/15640/18882

    If you saw today Nicholas Kristof’s Op Ed on leaving Iraq, it reads as a summary of Richardson’s plan for Iraq. See http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_6614043 and compare with http://www.richardsonforpresident.com/issues/iraq

    For those that think the race is over – Clinton has won and Richardson is just running for Vice President: Richardson is polling in Iowa at the same level John Kerry was the summer of 2003 (and far ahead of where Edwards was four years ago who finished a surprising second). Remember, almost half of the Iowa caucus voters in 2004 didn’t choose a candidate until less than a month before the election. In New Hampshire, Richardson is at 12%, only 3 points behind Edwards in the latest poll.

    Richardson was the only Democrat aside from Obama to show an increase in donations in the 2Q over the 1Q 2007. He has strong organizations in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada. He has enough money on hand to run competitive races in each of those states. Clinton and Obama can’t risk spending all their money on the early caucus/primary states or they’ll have nothing for Super Tuesday on February 5th.

    The only governor competing for the Democratic nomination, Richardson is uniquely positioned to win in November 2008. Over the past 30 years four governors have won the presidency. In the entire history of our nation, only two senators have accomplished that feat.

    Once Democrats in Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire focus on the race and the issue of how we leave Iraq, Richardson’s poll numbers will further improve.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: