Thursday, February 22, 2007

Fighting Yesterday's Argument to Deal with Today's Present is to be Stuck on Stupid


While doing some research for my follow up post on the "little known history of slavery", I came across this great quote in another Thomas Sowell article (it should be read, regarding the "factional" novel and movie, "Roots"):
what Winston Churchill said during World War II: "If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Some disastrous policies had been followed in the years leading up to World War II, and Churchill had sharply criticized those policies at the time but, now that the war was on, looking back could only interfere with the life-and-death job at hand.
I thought that passage aptly applies to today in regards to how the Democrats offer no solutions and only finger-pointing and blame-handing, on the issue of Iraq. As George Will says in the beginning of his piece in today's Washington Post,
Indiscriminate criticism of President George W. Bush is an infectious disease. Some conservatives seem to have caught it, but congressional Democrats might be crippled by it.
And Victor Davis Hanson opens his latest with,
Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs?
I find it only helpful to al Qaeda and America's enemies to observe this kind of rabid infighting amongst America's Congressional leadership. And how is it that these Democrats want to micromanage the war and yet be absolved of all responsibility for it? Is it that President Bush is "the decider" only when things aren't going well? So then, I suppose it's only right that Democrats not take credit for any of the successes; after all, many of those successes have occurred in spite of them, and not on account of.

Hillary's Bush-blame makes little sense when she refuses to admit she shares in having "made a mistake". If she is able to excuse her vote to authorize war based upon what she knew then, how is it in the same breath she is able to not excuse the President who made his decisions, based upon what he knew at the time as well? I find that it also reflects badly upon her, when she says if she knew now what she didn't know then, she would never have voted for the authorization. I believe that the irresponsible course of action based upon what we knew at the time, would have been to maintain the status quo. And based upon what we, the public, do know now, I think removal of Saddam was and is, a good thing.

President #42 was right in making "regime change" for Iraq a national policy; President #43 was right in having the courage to turn rhetoric into action.

Iraq is still a story without an ending. The Democrats want to quit. They have already resigned themselves to failure, although by any rational estimation in comparison to sacrifice and loss sustained in previous wars, Iraq is far from being a military disaster. Potentially, it will become a political foreign policy disaster should the U.S. abandon Iraq; a disaster not because we went in there in the first place, but because we did not have the moral courage and intestinal fortitude to stay there and finish what was started. As VDH concludes,
So instead of self-serving attacks on the present administration, Democratic senators and candidates should simply confess that while most of the earlier reasons to remove Saddam remain valid, the largely unforeseen costs of stabilizing Iraq in their view have proved too high, and now outweigh the dangers of leaving.

Labels: , , ,

2 Comments:

Blogger The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth said...

Democrats are reactionary and not problem solvers. That is why they only blame instead of provide, "solutions." They look for anything that provides a sound bite which will give them political hay while catering to their base positioning themselves for the next election.

Also providing solutions and acting on them takes risk if those solutions do not pan out exactly as one would wish. This politically means taking a hit in the polls and Dems are poll driven and never take risks so they can make everybody feel good about them.

Leadership means making decisions and taking risks and that is why they are poor leaders and even worse problem solvers!

Thursday, February 22, 2007 12:46:00 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Great Post Word,

I have noticed none of the Dems that voted FOR the War want to claim any responsibility when things go somewhat downhill. Yet they are so eager to lay all the blame at the President's feet. And you are right, they refuse to take any part of the blame, they only say "If I knew then what I know now" blah blah blah.

So when this does turn around, and things do calm down in Baghdad and the Suni Triangle area or any areas for that matter, I dont want to hear one Liberal heap praise on themselves for anything good happening in Iraq. When all along they have been saying what an awful mistake this has all been, and like Obama said "Our Troops lives were wasted", and blah blah blah.

Well except for Joe Lieberman, he knew this was the right thing to do from the get go!

Thursday, February 22, 2007 3:54:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Day By Day© by Chris Muir.

© Copyright, Sparks from the Anvil, All Rights Reserved