| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| âUnwinnableâ comment draws GOP fire |
| 2004-05-07 |
| Thursday, May 6, 2004 Posted: 7:19 PM EDT (2319 GMT) Democratic lawmaker says changes needed for victory From Ted Barrett CNN Washington Bureau WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A pro-military Democratic congressmanâs description of the war in Iraq as "unwinnable" unless changes are made sparked anger in House Republicans Thursday. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, in a news conference with Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said the problems in Iraq are due to a "lack of planning" by Pentagon chiefs and "the direction has got be changed or it is unwinnable." Republicans seized on that word, ignoring Murthaâs overall point: that more troops and equipment should be sent to Iraq. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, the majority leader, accused Murtha of participating in a "calculated and craven political stunt." Who is this @ssclownâs mentor, Ted Kennedy? "The Democrats are quitting, calling the war unwinnable while we have our men and women and their families sacrificing every day" charged Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Democrats are "basically giving aid and comfort to the enemy," echoed Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas. Murtha usually wins high praise from Republicans for regularly supporting increases to the Pentagonâs budget. As the top defense appropriator in his party, his views tend to carry a lot of weight. But the word "unwinnable" -- which greeted lawmakers Thursday morning above the fold in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call -- quickly became a Republican target. Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-California, who chairs the appropriationsâ defense subcommittee, said his friend was co-opted by Pelosi so she could drum up opposition to the war she voted against. He said it was part of "movement" by Pelosi and her strategists "because it could have an impact on election time." Sheâs "using the issue for purely campaign political purposes," Lewis said. At the news conference, Pelosi said Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld should resign because of his handling of the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. "He has been engaged in a cover-up on this issue and continues to be," she said. Murtha complained that the administration treats Congress "with absolute arrogance" but said he doesnât want Rumsfeld to resign. He also said he does not think the United States should withdraw from Iraq. Rather, he said, more troops and supplies should be sent. "We cannot prevail in this war with the policy we have today. We need to mobilize or get out," he said. "It would be devastating to pull out now, but it may be impossible to mobilize now that the public has turned against it," he said. Iâm obliged to place Murthaâs pronouncement on a par with the f**ksticks that abused prisoners in Iraq. Both have served only to damage the performance of our soldiers in the field. While freedom of speech certainly permits Murthaâs observations, it is also the duty of any good American to support our troops while they are in harmâs way. Undermining their morale, be it through misconduct or mischaracterization is a subtle form of treason. In Murthaâs case, his words are a flat out distortion. His statement is a slap in the face to those who fight, their commanders and the tools they campaign with. During the decades of my high technology work many projects Iâve participated in directly contributed to Americaâs military supremacy. In all those years it has never once occurred to me that I might sabotage any of those efforts. There is a glow of pride that such a thought did not cross my mind until I typed these words. Murthaâs sabotage of our troopsâ morale is a most wretched form of partisan sniping and makes no constructive addition to any dialogue about the Iraqi war. Sure, he has the freedom to say what he thinks. Like so many other politicians these days, he fails to realize that just because you have a right to do something, that does not make it the right thing to do. |
| Posted by:Zenster |
| #18 I know you think you're so funny and clever, but the readers of this site won't be fooled--you've been nailed as a shill and an apologist of the Left/Dims/Libs. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-07 11:11:29 PM |
| #17 And I'm sharp enough to believe that you'd approve of this horseshit from "your" Dim guys but rake Bush and Republicans over the coals for nothing! Jen, you are pathetic. Time to close yet another waste of this board's bandwidth. [Foghorn Leghorn] 'Bout as sharp as a bowling ball! [/FL] |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-05-07 10:58:09 PM |
| #16 Lest we forget, the Clinton pardons scandal was in the papers again today, too! Look for Bush to not be so protective of these documents in a second term, although I'm sure it makes him sick to his stomach that any American President would so tarnish the Oval Office with such behavior. Wonder how much Islamist terrorism Mark Rich has funded? |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-07 10:42:07 PM |
| #15 And of course, we now have a good number of Kerry's "band of brothers" coming forward saying that Kerry lied when he testified in front of Congress about ALL of the military committing "war crimes" in Vietnam and lied about his war wounds to get medals and then get sent home. Kerry's dirty whichever way you turn--and his wife won't release her tax records and that's where all the money and the Leftist donations are hidden. And I'm sharp enough to believe that you'd approve of this horseshit from "your" Dim guys but rake Bush and Republicans over the coals for nothing! We, the GOP, are the better party--in ethics, morals, principles and ideology! |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-07 10:35:23 PM |
| #14 Fear. Can you smell it? Desperation pheromones permeate RB. Disapproval! Rejection! Childhood terrors re-emerging... Pfeh. Some understand what's important. Some don't. Doesn't matter folks, here we have someone who cheats at solitaire. Take that to its logical conclusion and you find a person capable of anything, since they can't even be honest with themselves. Hey, who cares? It does not complete an honest discussion and refuses to puzzle out the conflicts and admit that, at the least, it is unworthy and unsound until it has done so, performed the internal fess-ups, and made peace with reality. It has no shame, so you can't drive it away. You can only ignore it. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-05-07 10:32:24 PM |
| #13 Does Rantburg have a pool going yet as to what happens this winter when Bush wins? Do you think we will send in more troops once the election is over, get more agressive with those we have, or what? I'm getting the feeling Bush is sorta "holding down the fort" right now, dealing with issues like Sadr as they arise but not making a final push. But, I also think that come November, if Bush wins, the next 90 days will be pretty busy in Iraq, and perhaps elsewhere. |
| Posted by: Beau 2004-05-07 10:31:49 PM |
| #12 There's a hell of a lot more evidence about Kerry, Gore and the Clintons taking illegal campaign contributions than there is about Bush! President Bush was thoroughly vetted about his finances when he ran for President in 2000. He's clean--the Dims aren't. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-07 10:29:47 PM |
| #11 Or we'll ask you about Gore, Billary and John Kerry getting funding from the ChiComs for missile secrets and jobs! Jen, are you so incredibly dense as to think I remotely approve of such horsesh!t? Such willingness to slander others really takes the shine off of your accusations. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-05-07 10:26:45 PM |
| #10 Zipper boy, this has all been investigated and there was no there, there. Old, old, old talking points straight from the DNC. Don't ever complain about partisan sniping again. Or we'll ask you about Gore, Billary and John Kerry getting funding from the ChiComs for missile secrets and jobs! |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-07 10:21:58 PM |
| #9 cingold, where have I ever said "kill them all, let God sort them out?" My outlines of a credible deterrent against terrorism are specifically oriented towards avoiding the mass slaughter of Muslims that others around these parts seem to advocate. Please provide quotes indicating my support for such genocide. As to crooks in the White House. Need I remind you that politicians of every stripe are not only supposed to avoid any direct conflicts of interest, but even the appearance of any conflict of interest? Caesar's wife and all that. NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - President Bush borrowed money from oil company Harken Energy Corp. while he was a member of its board, a practice he condemned this week as part of his plan to curb corporate abuse and fraud, the White House acknowledged Thursday. ... Bush reported that stock sale 34 weeks later than SEC regulations required, and he's been unable to explain why. Then there's Cheney and Scalia's cozy little tete a tete. WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spent part of last week duck hunting together at a private camp in south Louisiana, just three weeks after the Supreme Court agreed to take up an appeal by the vice president in lawsuits over his handling of the administration's energy task force. Need I point out how the Halliburton KBR misconduct in Iraq has severely damaged American credibility as to our motives for being there? From all outward appearances, the situation positively reeks of wartime freebooting, regardless of whether it has happened or not. It would be puerile to say that this was not rather easy to foresee. With Enron's executive officers pleading guilty it might be prudent to open for public inspection White House negotiations with that corrupt and defunct energy firm. WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A report issued Wednesday by a Democratic congressman critical of the White House for not releasing records of the closed-door meetings of Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force said "there are at least 17 policies in the White House energy plan that were advocated by Enron or that benefited Enron." "The range of policies in the White House energy plan that would help Enron is enormous," Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California, wrote in a letter to Cheney asking him again to release information about White House contacts with Enron and other energy companies while the plan was being formulated. "This creates an unfortunate appearance that a large contributor received special access and obtained extraordinarily favorable results in the White House energy plan," Waxman wrote. Other donations, like those of the "Pioneers" have raised eyebrows as well. In each case, the Pioneer has helped Bush win election and Bush Administration policies have benefited the Pioneer - in many cases, at the expense of the public interest. - EMPHASIS ADDED - Even in the absence of any guilt involved in these circumstances, there nonetheless remains a distinct semblance of misconduct. There is most definitely the appearance of a conflict of interest. I require better answers than those provided so far and feel that America deserves them as well. I welcome you to provide any cites or links conclusively proving a complete absence of wrongdoing as regards the above cites. Is it possible for you to openly avow that there is absolutely no appearance of any conflict of interest presented by these situations, cingold? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-05-07 10:16:30 PM |
| #8 Deacon, Comrade Polosi and the other lefies hope that hanging a label on something will help their cause. Bush is a liar and attacks Kerry's war record! Yet ask them to point to a lie or an attack and they change the subject. Congressman Rangel wants to impeach Rummy but can't find a specific charge to make that happen. In order to impeach someone they have had to commit a felony crime. There has been no crime committed! They are all just being political opportunists and I pray that it bites them back in November! |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2004-05-07 10:05:45 PM |
| #7 I can't figure out how Ms. Pelosi could make the statement that the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse was and still is being covered up by Rummy. The abuse was made public back in January. Just because the press didn't run with it back then doesn't mean there has been a cover up. There are on-going investigations that do not need to be compromised. In ANY possible criminal investigation not all information is ever made available because of the need to protect the rights of the accused. The Liberal Democrats never cease to amaze me. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2004-05-07 8:39:17 PM |
| #6 Zenster, more than one person here has asked you about the same or similar question: How do you square your âkill them all, let God sort them outâ rhetoric with your âBush is a crookâ rhetoric? Do you believe you know of someone better able to handle the WOT? |
| Posted by: cingold 2004-05-07 6:37:25 PM |
| #5 Funny you should worry about my head exploding.... You really shouldn't deal with even the most simple of political thoughts because you are going to hurt yourself even further. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-07 6:35:59 PM |
| #4 Jen, your baseless speculations as to my political alignment are pretty hilarious. Have you ever considered that I might actually detest all career politicians with equal vigor? You may not want to as your pretty little (and I do mean little) head might explode. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-05-07 6:27:08 PM |
| #3 Zipper, your use of the diminutive "Shrub" for the Commander-in-Chief and your "belief" that he "stole" the election are part and parcel of the partisan sniping that you are supposedly condemning. It's a package deal--believe like you and Murtha do or not at all. If you'll believe one Leftist lie, you're required to swallow the whole lie package. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-07 6:00:17 PM |
| #2 more troops and supplies should be sent. "We cannot prevail in this war with the policy we have today. more troops only when it is time to move onto syria and/or iran.. and we have already prevailed in this theater of war....yes there will still be insurgents who will attack our forces but we are going nowhere and the majority of iraq is peacefull.............. and we will not when this war just in iraq..like i said it is only a theater of operations... |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-05-07 5:52:33 PM |
| #1 Throwing more into Iraq is not a plan. We only need 2 things for victory in Iraq: 1. Give the military what IT says it needs and then ALLOW them to do their job. 2. The Democrats must stop sabotaging the war effort for political gain. They're pathetic. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2004-05-07 5:08:22 PM |