Pigs take wing: WaPo critical of Democrats on Iraq
The Washington Post editorial page continues to show a remarkable surge of reason. The editors describe Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki’s recent trip to Iran and his insistence that he will not abide by Iran’s demands that he abandon the ongoing negotiations for a formal alliance between his country and the US. The newspaper points out that the Democrats have condemned this agreement even before it’s been drawn up.
The WaPo piece sounds as though the editors have woken up from a long period of sleep and are shocked—shocked!—that many leading Democrats are taking this stance. That the WaPo can be so very surprised at the negative attitude of many Democrats towards any success in Iraq, and at the shortsightedness of their worldview, is—well—surprising.
But unless the piece is being sarcastic, the editors’ astonishment seems genuine. I can’t say where they’ve been till now, but I welcome their return to earth.
This is the kind of language the editors use [emphasis mine]:
So it’s hard to fathom why Democrats in Congress have joined Ayatollah Khamenei in denouncing the U.S.-Iraqi agreements…
Critics such as Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) are professing to be outraged …
They claim to be shocked by the suggestions of Sen. John McCain….
While building a similar bond [to ours with Japan and Korea] with Iraq may prove impossible, it’s hard to understand why Democrats would oppose it in principle…
Hard to understand the Democrats? Not really.
I’ll explain: the first order of business is to cover their own butts. Since they have gone on record for many years, loudly and repeatedly, as not just predicting but knowing that the war in Iraq is bad, lost, hopeless, and the fault of the Republicans, their political lives depend on that being true. And that trumps all other considerations.
And besides, Iran is such a tiny country. How much harm could it do?
“The WaPo piece sounds as though the editors have woken up from a long period of sleep and are shocked–shocked!–that many leading Democrats are taking this stance.”
Perhaps the WAPO just doesn’t quite, yet, understand the forces that are now in control of the Democratic Party.
Perhaps they are still living in the past.
vanderleun Says:
True… it has been a very recent change. Eight years ago it was DLC moderate dems running things. Even four years ago the Moveon types were still only mounting their attack. Yeah, it’s only been a couple years of them actually running stuff (everyday dems using their POV / talking points)… Now Obama makes it clear who, exactly, is running the show over there…
Since they have gone on record for many years, loudly and repeatedly, as not just predicting but knowing that the war in Iraq is bad, lost, hopeless, and the fault of the Republicans, their political lives depend on that being true.
How I wish that were true!
While the Moveons and their tame dems know they lie, some of the deluded think they tell the truth, and others are so deluded as to think that, although the dems are wrong as a matter of fact, they’re sincere, mistaken but sincere.
However, at the margins, the, uh, um, er, insincerity is becoming obvious.
It’s better to get what you want from a lie before it and you are exposed. If you get exposed and didn’t get what you want, it’s lose-lose.
Makes me sad.
“Perhaps the WAPO just doesn’t quite, yet, understand the forces that are now in control of the Democratic Party.”
The worse problem is that the forces now in control of the Democratic Party do not understand the forces now in control of the Democratic Party. Their self-misunderstanding can have the effect of harming us all, unfortunately.
Walking near and through Boston Common and Public Garden I am always reminded of Iraq when I pass by the statues of Lincoln and Washington, the first depicting the Emancipation, the latter reflecting the leadership at Valley Forge in the dead of winter as the Americans were hanging on to a thin chance of victory. I ponder those things and then I think of the spectacle of Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader, and his “war is lost” speech even as we had troops in harms’ way, engaged in battle with a sworn enemy…and I thought, what are the chances that the US will erect a statue one day to such a despicable person?
I have to keep reminding myself that there are a lot of people that have invested heavily in a US defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not all of them are Al-Qaeda.
I have two possible explanations for this phenomenon:
Maybe the WaPo is making a last minute attempt to salvage a small bit of their credibility… Good luck with that.
Perhaps they are trying to get the Titanic of defeatism they have helped to build turned around in time so that Obama can take credit for the victory. (If he is elected…Shudder!)
Sadly, they approach one out of one. Rick, this was well written.
It occurs to me that the bungholes who are saying such things as the Dem leadership say are relying on their present bungholery to make people forget their previous bungholery. It saddens me to think that the attempt will probably work.
I have noted in recent years that the Washington Post has been becoming more objective in their reporting…just as journalism ought to be.
their political lives depend on that being true.
Huxley: “How I wish that were true!”
Me too, but it is not. They are, as are career politicians from both sides of the aisle, masters at disingenuity and sweeping inconvenient truths under the rug. Sen. Jay Rockefeller springs immediately to mind with his recent “Bush Lied” spin on a report that says anything but that.
Roughly 3/4s of the voters in this country vote by brand name. Kennedy, Rockefeller, Bush, Byrd: all well-known brands, but no understanding on the part of the common voter as to the ingredients that go into the product.
Defeatist Dems will pay no penalty whatsoever for being wholly wrong on Iraq. In fact, many will be rewarded in the voting booth for their vociferous naysaying.
Is it unusual thet the Democrat “election plan” requires defeat in Iraq, retreat in the face of a looney Iran, a miserable economy, high fuel and food costs and no exploration at home for more, and home foreclosures? If any of these negatives were touted as positives, the Democrat issue page vanishes. The misery index also acts as a screen to avoid critical evaluation of Mr. Obama and his lack of Presidential credentials.
A commenter actually used “emancipation” in the context of Iraq? That’s nice. I’d guess that the Iraqis have had about all the emancipatin’ that they can stand.
I’d guess that the Iraqis have had about all the emancipatin’ that they can stand.
Montysano — Few anti-war advocates bother to go beyond snide comments to check on what Iraqis actually think about the war. In polls the majority of Iraqis have consistently supported the invasion of their own country because things were that bad under Hussein. See http://engram-backtalk.blogspot.com/2006/09/no-nonsense-overview-of-public-opinion.html.