Thursday, August 02, 2007

Democratic Leadership betting against America?

There seems to be more and more people who believe the surge in Iraq is working. On Monday, I wrote how the New York Times and Newt Gingrich are both saying we need to stay the course. I have written numerous times on here about the cost of America leaving our allies in Iraq on their own.

Since Monday, there are more and more articles appearing on the web discussing both the New York Times comments on the Iraq war, and the reaction by Democrats. Before I question the motives of some of the Democrats, I want to point out that I don’t believe all Democrats, and certainly not all Democratic voters think like Pelosi, Reid, Clinton, et al. For example, the House Majority Whip, James Clyburn (D-South Carolina) says that success in Iraq is a real problem for the Democrats. The more good news out of Iraq, the less likely the “Blue Dog Caucus” of Democrats are to vote to leave Iraq. If the Republicans and the Blue Dogs are both willing to wait on the September report from Petraeus, Pelosi and Reid won’t be able to get the votes to require our troops to leave Iraq. Hence the “real big problem” as Rep Clyburn put it.

There have also been many comments and articles on the Junior Representative from Kansas and her comments. While the House Armed Services Committee was being briefed by General Jack Keane, Rep. Nancy Boyda (D- Kansas) walked out of the briefing distressed. When she returned, she said, “There is only so much you can take until we in fact had to leave the room for a while. So I think I am back and maybe can articulate some things -- after so much frustration of having to listen to what we listened too.” Rep. Boyda went on to say, “Those kinds of comments will in fact show up in the media and further divide this country instead of saying, here’s the reality of the problem.” What did General Keane say that upset her so much? While noting that there are still problems in Iraq, the General was explaining some of the success we are currently having in Iraq. How can the United States succeeding in Iraq be so offensive?

The New York Times did a poll recently to gauge the American support for the war in Iraq. When they found that people who supported the United States going to war in Iraq had risen from 35 percent to 42 percent, they were confused and bewildered, and immediately redid the poll. The problem is that the second version of the poll showed the same result: American support for the war in Iraq is increasing, not decreasing.

And finally, for those of you keeping score at home, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) is also supporting the surge. In addition to being a Democrat, Rep. Ellison is also the only Muslim in Congress. The AP quotes him recently as saying, “The success in Ramadi is not just because of bombs and bullets, but because the U.S. and Iraqi military and the Iraqi police are partnering with the tribal leadership and the religious leadership.”

While we are a long way from leaving Iraq, there is a lot of good news coming out of Iraq. Many believe the surge is working. However, the Democratic leadership doesn’t want to hear it. While Boyda is a junior member, it is not that hard to imagine Reid, Pelosi, or Murtha trying to follow her example at the next military briefing they get. The Democratic leadership is actively pulling against any success by the American military in Iraq. Many politicians before them have tried to bet against America with their political careers. What happened to those politicians? They find themselves on the ash heap of history. Pelosi, Reid, and the rest better learn to support the country they claim to represent, or start brushing off those resumes.

No comments: