Dems Play More Politics With Soldier's Lives

Caught between the anti-war Left and their more responsible elements, the Democrats are taking their cut and run strategy to a new low by attempting to carve out what amounts to nothing more than a political move at a time when our country is at war. Even the New York Times is forced to acknowledge the purely political move. But they fail to point out the larger ramifications.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Democratic leaders are developing an anti-war proposal that wouldn't cut off money for U.S. troops in Iraq but would require President Bush to acknowledge problems with an overburdened military.

The plan could draw bipartisan support but is expected to be a tough sell to members who say they don't think it goes far enough to assuage voters angered by the four-year conflict.

The tactic is more likely to embarrass Bush politically than force his hand on the war. He would have to sign repeated waivers for units and report to Congress those units with equipment shortfalls and other problems.

The President is the Commander-In-Chief. He is attempting to win what has become a difficult war, whatever the reason. Now, for purely political purposes, the Democrats would have him bow and scrape before them, while sending a misleading message to the honorable men and women in, or being sent into harm's way.

The military faced drastic cutbacks during the Clinton years. And despite Democrat spin, the DOD has achieved great things in seeing to it that our soldiers enter battle with the appropriate gear. Responding to the Dems' armor shortage meme

None of which evidently matters to Democrats, their only concern being political, even if it means unnecessarily undermining the CIC and damaging the morale of American troops as they go off to war.

Obviously when it comes to things military, the Democrats have absolutely no shame.

Comments

[Hard Right]

Dan, what do you expect from power hungry socialists? Power at any cost. It's okay though. They're going to create "heavan on earth". (Where's the puking smiley?)

[Dan Riehl]

Ain't it the truth. Sad ... just sad.

[BobInStamford]

Sorry heros, you've had 4 years to pacify the goatherders. Since you couldn't, its time for a new strategy.

[Darth Malice]

Bob,Al Queda has been trying to penetrate the west part of China.They get caught,tortured,shot in the back of the head.No problem.GW could learn from this.

[lozzie]

arlen spector and lugar were interviewed yesterday and both SUPPORT revising biush's authorization for war. spector said he has the votes he needs too! I CAN'T WAIT!!!

[Capitalist Infidel]

What's truly amazing is that liberals should be at the forefront of this war. The enemy stones to death homosexuals, they hang women who have been raped. They sentence to death those who wish to leave their "religion. How can one's hate for two men (Bush and Cheney) be so overwhelming that they would side with these people?

[Hard Right]

Bob, it would have been 2 if not for mental patients like you.

[Phoenix]

I can't understand why only the 'conservatives' on this blog continue to address Andrew/Carl/Bob/Artie as if he is worthy of attention. The libs on the blog don't even acknowledge his existence. Who are the smart ones here?

[Zifnab]

"Sorry heros, you've had 4 years to pacify the goatherders. Since you couldn't, its time for a new strategy."

Pacify? Last I checked, Republican donors were handing out $150,000 so the terrorists could afford nighvision goggles. Strange how all those wiretappings and invasions of privacy didn't catch him, but old-fashion police work did. Maybe if the NSA wasn't so busy sorting Ted Kennedy off the No-Fly list...

Seriously, the past six years has been nothing but "fail", "fail", "fail", "attempted port deal with Dubai", "fail", "massive expenditure of cash for nothing", "fail", "fail", "warmonger", "fail", "look stupid".

At the very least, conservatives could rally around a few of the Republicans like Specter and Snowe who at least pretend to be sane.

[Legalize]

Wait, is it the Dems who are unlawfully appropriating money to arm Suni groups linked to Al Q? Is it the Dems who are giving money to a supporter who is in turn giving money to extremists groups - all while STILL HOLDING ONTO the money that supporter gave them? Is it the Dems who are lying about Iran's capabilities and then changing their story whenever called on it? Is it the Dems who are causing reservists to serve 3 and 4 tours in Iraq? Is it the Dems who are letting Afgahnistan be re-taken by the Taliban? Is it the Dems who are letting the Saudis get away with whatever they like? Is it the Dems who installed an anti-Israel regime in Iraq? Is it the Dems who said "mission accomplished" in May 2003? Is it the Dems who lied about Saddam's nuclear capabilities in the 2002 state of the union address?

Oh, right, Clinton got a blowjob.

[Bill Adkins]

Pay attention, class - America won the war - we defeated Saddam and we defeated Iraq. Don't lie about how we've yet to win the war when we won a resounding victory. If you want to fight another war in Iraq, then pick a sect, ally with them and attack and destroy the other. Then you can say we have a war to win. But until then, note our armed forces are - PROFANITY WARNING: FUCKING SURROUNDED by the various sides in a civil war. Where is the front? If you don't have one you are surrounded. Get a clue, Bush.

[Phoenix]

Uh oh. 683

Bill,

You get a clue. This war doesn't have a front.

[Bill Adkins]

Uh - Phoenix,

work on your reading comprehension problem - that's what I said and that's the problem.

[Phoenix]

Uh, Bill Adkins, Lawyer supreme with a handgun in his desk drawer:

You get a clue. You talked about Iraq. This war on terror is not just in Iraq. We're surrounded worldwide by this 'front' of fanaticism.

[Scott]

Zifnab. Leave it to a pin-headed liberal parrot to spout-off his spurts of nasty goo. You know, liberals are an absolutely pathetic group. Always nasty, always negative and with quite over-inflated air of superiority. Most of your remarks are seriously flawed and use the flimsiest of details to support an argument.

Moonbat doesn't do you justice. Moonbat shithouse crazy is closer, but since we're not all about the same kind of nastiness as you libo-progressive douchebags, we'll just leave it at that.