Thursday, January 25, 2007

Godspeed and tough luck

From today’s WashPost main editorial:

On Tuesday, nearly every member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee warmly endorsed Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the new U.S. commander in Iraq, and a number wished him success or "Godspeed" in his mission. Yesterday some of the same senators voted for a resolution that opposes the increase of troops for Gen. Petraeus's command -- even though the general testified that he could not accomplish his mission without the additional forces and hinted that such a resolution could encourage the enemy. Such is the muddle of Congress on Iraq: A majority may soon go on record opposing the new offensive in Baghdad even while encouraging the commander who leads it.
As James Taranto notes, the Democrats are still “figuring out” how to support and oppose the troops.

4 comments:

The Republicans support the troops. Frequently, on gurneys. said...

Yes, but will the GOP ever "figure out" that the public has rejected their asinine "Democrats are against the troops" sales pitch?

Hint: they know it ain't the Democrats who've gotten 26,000+ soldiers maimed or killed for an old grudge and bullshit. Best of luck dragging around that obsolete talking point. The classic Karl Rove playbook worked so fabulously last November.

Roscoe Arbuckle said...

Last night on Brit Hume's show, they discuss how the Dems warmly embraced Petraeus while condemning his plan for Baghdad.

We're best not trying to understand.

Eric said...

And the Democrats, having listened to the will of the American people, are moving to protect the troops with a flurry of non-binding resolutions. Congress is just a rubber stamp, but a deeply-disappointed one now.

Congratulations on your authorizing mandate in November: you've done so well with it. Besides, we know the previous three elections were just flukes.

The Coalition of the Wilting." said...

Ah, I see. So if the Democrats had come storming in with investigations and impeachments and Iraq budget cuts, thed have been overstepping. Because they won't do that, they're understepping. Either way, they suck. Duly noted!

I wouldn't make botched mandate jokes if I were you. Bush said he had a mandate in late 2004. Within months he was crippled, and now he's an isolated asterisk. The Dems, who didn't lose a single seat in either house, aren't going to repeat his dumb mistakes. Watch and learn. They're going to ride out their much more credible mandate for a lot longer than The Decider could. And don't forget how the 2008 Senate seats are looking: the future's so blue, I gotta wear shades.

The non-binding resolution is all about giving Bush and the GOP more rope with which to choke themselves.

If Bush's troop surge turns Iraq around, then the midtempo Democratic tactics may fail. You keep hoping for that. Me, I'm polishing my shades.