CO Dem Sen. Ken Salazar gives a pretty accurate portrayal of the BS doublespeak of the "new Congress in town".
On one hand, he breaks party lines by announcing Congress should not be cutting off troop funding. In the next breath, he's criticizing Bush for worsening "the extreme partisan divide" on Iraq by questioning Democrats' support for the troops.
I see... the Dems whine that they shouldn't be criticized for questioning the Prez, but don't think they themselves should be questioned for their behavior. Huh?
*************************************
Salazar also complains the WH and Congress have largely ignored the ISG Report's 79 recommendations.
Has Salazar read these recommendations? Most that are within the US's power to implement have been addressed. However the bulk of them require actions from other countries - from forming an "international support group" of countries that want no part of such to Iraqi's changing their governments structure. And how exactly can the US can force other countries to behave responsibly?
At least 5 or 6 of these have to do with advancing the Israel/Palestinian peace process. Again, if the players don't want to play the game, there is little we can do, as history has shown. But of course, the ISG even suggests what Israel should give up in land. How nice of them...
For those that require a reconstruction of the Iraqi govt departments themselves, I have this to say. That is something that can only be US suggestions and carried out by a willing Iraqi parliament so that it is an Iraqi form of democracy, and not a US creation. The US cannot dictate to Iraq how to form their government and expect it to stand. It is their make it or break it quest.
However there are a vast number of the ISG recommendations that are indeed implemented. "Largely ignored" is not an accurate representation.
In fact, one of the recommendations that HAS been implemented is the subject of all the latest fooferah... the "surge". That would be RECOMMENDATION 39, folks... parts reprinted below.
RECOMMENDATION 39: The United States should provide financial and technical support and establish a single office in Iraq to coordinate assistance to the Iraqi government and its expert advisors to aid a program to disarm, demobilize, and reintegrate militia members.
3. Security and Military Forces
snip
Because of the importance of Iraq to our regional security goals and to our ongoing fight against al Qaeda, we considered proposals to make a substantial increase (100,000 to 200,000) in the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. We rejected this course because we do not believe that the needed levels are available for a sustained deployment. Further, adding more American troops could conceivably worsen those aspects of the security problem that are fed by the view that the U.S. presence is intended to be a long-term “occupation.”
We could, however, support a short term redeployment or surge of American combat forces to stabilize Baghdad, or to speed up the training and equipping mission, if the U.S. commander in Iraq determines that such steps would be effective.
We also rejected the immediate withdrawal of our troops, because we believe that so much is at stake. We believe that our recommended actions will give the Iraqi Army the support it needs to have a reasonable chance to take responsibility for Iraq’s security. Given the ongoing deterioration in the security situation, it is urgent to move as quickly as possible to have that security role taken over by Iraqi security forces.
Me thinks the Dem's railing against the surge is much ado about nothing, and was a suggestion put forth by their "god", the ISG.
*************************************
THE ROSIE FOOFERAH
Rosie runs off at the mouth, revealing just who and what she is. That is her American right, it's the network's right to collect on the increased ratings. Have no problems with that. I just don't watch.
But why is everyone yelling at Rosie? The bigger question is, why is she the only one talking? The "respected" journalist, Barbara Walters, sits back, allowing such idiocies and conspiracy theories to be presented without debate of facts?
"The View" should be changed to "Rosie's View, and only Rosie's View". And Ms. Walters, with her background, should be ashamed of herself to allow Rosie's diatribes to be the only voice of "The View". My suggestion is the venom should be turned on Walters for her silence.
**************************************
Cindy Sheehan has a couple of nonsensical bits. The first is the not-so-surprising "we can't depend on the Democrats" comment. Have to say, it's first time I've ever agreed with Sheehan on anthing - altho not for the same reasons.
Cindy feels "betrayed", saying "They got there and they betrayed the grass roots that put them back there". I think if Ms. Sheehan will stop her protest travels long enough to read details on the last election, she will find it was far more moderate Dems who made the ticket, and the not Pelosi-Murtha extremists in the new seats. She will also find that even the moderate Dems win was a sliver of a majority... hardly a runaway issue, as she proclaims.
Then, of course, there's the obvious indicator in Connecticut, where voters had their choice between an outspoken, anti-war Dem, or the new Independent out-of-favor Lieberman. Needless to say, with Lieberman's landslide victory, Sheehan can't count on Connecticut to stand with her.
The second Sheehan faux pas is her invocation of Christ's resurrection in her seasonal 15 min of fame spot.
Apparently Ms. Sheehan is unaware that Christ rose on the third day and soon thereafter ascended into heaven. He didn't hang around to raise a family, unless you believe the Da Vinci version. DOH! Perhaps that's it!
However, if she chooses to indulge in Christian-speak, and refer to Scripture to make her point, then she should also continue with the Christian belief that the fallen soldiers are also with Christ in Heaven. And that's a far superior spot than here on earth. Thereby her Good Friday statement is nothing short of ludicrous exploitation.
On one hand, he breaks party lines by announcing Congress should not be cutting off troop funding. In the next breath, he's criticizing Bush for worsening "the extreme partisan divide" on Iraq by questioning Democrats' support for the troops.
I see... the Dems whine that they shouldn't be criticized for questioning the Prez, but don't think they themselves should be questioned for their behavior. Huh?
*************************************
Salazar also complains the WH and Congress have largely ignored the ISG Report's 79 recommendations.
Has Salazar read these recommendations? Most that are within the US's power to implement have been addressed. However the bulk of them require actions from other countries - from forming an "international support group" of countries that want no part of such to Iraqi's changing their governments structure. And how exactly can the US can force other countries to behave responsibly?
At least 5 or 6 of these have to do with advancing the Israel/Palestinian peace process. Again, if the players don't want to play the game, there is little we can do, as history has shown. But of course, the ISG even suggests what Israel should give up in land. How nice of them...
For those that require a reconstruction of the Iraqi govt departments themselves, I have this to say. That is something that can only be US suggestions and carried out by a willing Iraqi parliament so that it is an Iraqi form of democracy, and not a US creation. The US cannot dictate to Iraq how to form their government and expect it to stand. It is their make it or break it quest.
However there are a vast number of the ISG recommendations that are indeed implemented. "Largely ignored" is not an accurate representation.
In fact, one of the recommendations that HAS been implemented is the subject of all the latest fooferah... the "surge". That would be RECOMMENDATION 39, folks... parts reprinted below.
RECOMMENDATION 39: The United States should provide financial and technical support and establish a single office in Iraq to coordinate assistance to the Iraqi government and its expert advisors to aid a program to disarm, demobilize, and reintegrate militia members.
3. Security and Military Forces
snip
Because of the importance of Iraq to our regional security goals and to our ongoing fight against al Qaeda, we considered proposals to make a substantial increase (100,000 to 200,000) in the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. We rejected this course because we do not believe that the needed levels are available for a sustained deployment. Further, adding more American troops could conceivably worsen those aspects of the security problem that are fed by the view that the U.S. presence is intended to be a long-term “occupation.”
We could, however, support a short term redeployment or surge of American combat forces to stabilize Baghdad, or to speed up the training and equipping mission, if the U.S. commander in Iraq determines that such steps would be effective.
We also rejected the immediate withdrawal of our troops, because we believe that so much is at stake. We believe that our recommended actions will give the Iraqi Army the support it needs to have a reasonable chance to take responsibility for Iraq’s security. Given the ongoing deterioration in the security situation, it is urgent to move as quickly as possible to have that security role taken over by Iraqi security forces.
Me thinks the Dem's railing against the surge is much ado about nothing, and was a suggestion put forth by their "god", the ISG.
*************************************
THE ROSIE FOOFERAH
Rosie runs off at the mouth, revealing just who and what she is. That is her American right, it's the network's right to collect on the increased ratings. Have no problems with that. I just don't watch.
But why is everyone yelling at Rosie? The bigger question is, why is she the only one talking? The "respected" journalist, Barbara Walters, sits back, allowing such idiocies and conspiracy theories to be presented without debate of facts?
"The View" should be changed to "Rosie's View, and only Rosie's View". And Ms. Walters, with her background, should be ashamed of herself to allow Rosie's diatribes to be the only voice of "The View". My suggestion is the venom should be turned on Walters for her silence.
**************************************
Cindy Sheehan has a couple of nonsensical bits. The first is the not-so-surprising "we can't depend on the Democrats" comment. Have to say, it's first time I've ever agreed with Sheehan on anthing - altho not for the same reasons.
Cindy feels "betrayed", saying "They got there and they betrayed the grass roots that put them back there". I think if Ms. Sheehan will stop her protest travels long enough to read details on the last election, she will find it was far more moderate Dems who made the ticket, and the not Pelosi-Murtha extremists in the new seats. She will also find that even the moderate Dems win was a sliver of a majority... hardly a runaway issue, as she proclaims.
Then, of course, there's the obvious indicator in Connecticut, where voters had their choice between an outspoken, anti-war Dem, or the new Independent out-of-favor Lieberman. Needless to say, with Lieberman's landslide victory, Sheehan can't count on Connecticut to stand with her.
The second Sheehan faux pas is her invocation of Christ's resurrection in her seasonal 15 min of fame spot.
"Our message is: Today is Good Friday, when Jesus Christ was killed by the Roman Empire. He rose again on Sunday, came back to life. But our loved ones won't be coming home" from Iraq, she told reporters.
Apparently Ms. Sheehan is unaware that Christ rose on the third day and soon thereafter ascended into heaven. He didn't hang around to raise a family, unless you believe the Da Vinci version. DOH! Perhaps that's it!
However, if she chooses to indulge in Christian-speak, and refer to Scripture to make her point, then she should also continue with the Christian belief that the fallen soldiers are also with Christ in Heaven. And that's a far superior spot than here on earth. Thereby her Good Friday statement is nothing short of ludicrous exploitation.
No comments:
Post a Comment