November 17, 2005
"Cut and Run" Now Out In the Open
It's good to know that even the Democrats have a few folks who never get the memo.
Hawkish Democrat Calls for Iraq Pullout
Nov 17, 2005
By Liz Sidoti
WASHINGTON (AP) - An influential House Democrat who voted for the Iraq war called Thursday for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, another sign of growing unease in Congress about the conflict.
"It is time for a change in direction," said Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., one of Congress' most hawkish Democrats. "Our military is suffering, the future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf region."
House Republicans assailed Murtha's position as one of abandonment and surrender, and accused Democrats of playing politics with the war. "They want us to retreat. They want us to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists of the world," Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., said in a statement.
Murtha estimated that all U.S. troops could be pulled out within six months. A decorated Vietnam veteran, he choked back tears during his remarks to reporters.
And I suspect the Democratic leadership was choking back rage and fury: here they are, desperately trying to convince the American people that the Democrats can be trusted with national-security policy, that we don't have to worry that they'll cut and run from Iraq if they get into power... and along comes "an influential House Democrat," "one of Congress' most hawkish Democrats," and "a decorated Vietnam veteran" who nakedly says exactly that!
Note that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) refused even to attend Murtha's press conference and was at pains later to distance herself from his tearful offer to surrender the United States to Musab Zarqaqi.
And this is not just some wackjob back-bencher, either... Murtha is about as good as it gets in Democratic circles; he has what passes for gravitas there:
The top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, Murtha has earned bipartisan respect for his grasp of military issues over three decades in Congress. He planned to introduce a resolution Thursday that, if passed by both the House and the Senate, would force the president to withdraw U.S. troops.
This is about the greatest present that the Democrats could give Bush and the Republicans, and coming at such a critical moment, too! Every Democrat in the House and Senate will once again have to go on record as advocating either an immediate, John-Kerryesque surrender in the global war on terrorism -- thus infuriating the American people -- or else advocating that we follow Bush's strategy of staying the course... thus enraging their paymasters at MoveOn.org, International ANSWER (another stupid acronym), and the Tides Foundation!
Could this possibly get any better?
By the way, two pet peeves of mine. Number one:
First elected to Congress in 1974, Murtha is known as an ally of uniformed officers in the Pentagon and on the battlefield. The perception on Capitol Hill is that when the congressman makes a statement on military issues, he's talking for those in uniform.
The fallacy of using proxy measurements instead of just measuring the actual event of interest
We also see this in the liberal "proof" that there is pervasive "right-wing bias" in the media: the media consist of big corporations -- Knight Ridder, Columbia Broadcasting System, and so forth; but we all know that corporations are right wing; therefore, the New York Times and the Washington Post, being corporations, must be biased towards the right wing.
In law, the principle is that of "best evidence," at least if Perry Mason (my main source of authoritative legal knowledge) knew what he was talking about: the best evidence of what is in, say, a will is the will itself, not someone talking about what he read in the will. You can only introduce the latter when the former is unavailable. In our mass-media example, we have only to look at how they treat liberals vs. conservatives in the actual articles they publish, and we see that they are in fact biased to the left -- as are many corporations. That is the best evidence.
In the Murtha case, surveys of soldiers are readily available; they get polled all the time. And I have never seen a single one where a majority of soldiers or sailors advocated the surrender for which Murtha here calls. So instead of reporting the "perception" that "he's talking for those in uniform," why not simply note that the best evidence indicates he decidedly is not?
His voice cracked and tears filled his eyes as he related several stories of visiting wounded troops, including one who was blinded and lost both his hands but had been denied a Purple Heart because friendly fire caused his injuries.
"I met with the commandant. I said, 'If you don't give him a Purple Heart, I'll give him one of mine.' And they gave him a Purple Heart," said Murtha, who has two.
The fallacy of the uncheckable anecdote
Name, please? So we can check out whether this really happened as Murtha relates, or whether it's a fabrication, like the atrocity stories of Jimmy Massey (or John Kerry, for that matter), now proven (by testimony of five embedded journalists) to be utter fakes.
This is astonishing... the mainstream Democrat who advocates turning Iraq into Vietnam is the political gift that just keeps on giving! If Ken Mehlman is on his game, we should start seeing Rep. Murtha in Republican television commercials about May or June of next year.
Hatched by Dafydd on this day, November 17, 2005, at the time of 2:53 PM
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/230
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Cut and Run" Now Out In the Open:
» Democratic Senator calls for immediate troop withdrawal from Sister Toldjah
…. also known as the cut and run approach: WASHINGTON (CNN) — Warning that other global threats “cannot be ignored,” Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, a leading adviser on defense issues, called Thursday for the immediate with... [Read More]
Tracked on November 17, 2005 5:24 PM
» Filibuster Against PATRIOTism? from Big Lizards
That's the implication from a bipartisan group of six senators who are so upset that we keep paying more attention to protecting the American people against terrorism than we do to protecting the sacred civil liberties of terrorists that they... [Read More]
Tracked on November 17, 2005 9:03 PM
» "Cut and Run" -- the Slap Back from Big Lizards
Antimedia writes in the comments to "Cut and Run" Now Out In the Open that the White House has already responded to Rep. Murtha's call for capitulation to Musab Zarqawi and the merry men of al-Qaeda in Iraq: Statement by... [Read More]
Tracked on November 17, 2005 11:23 PM
The following hissed in response by: RBMN
I'm old enough to remember the Late '60s and Early '70s and the mass rallies against the Vietnam War on the particular college campus that I lived close to at the time. And I can tell you exactly when those mass protests, rallies, and boycotts against "the killing in Vietnam" stopped. It all stopped when the fear of being drafted stopped. That's when it stopped. After America abandoned the South Vietnamese. Soon after the, the South Vietnamese and the Cambodians were being slaughtered by the millions, by the communists, and all those young people that I saw protesting "the horrible killing," just a few years before, just didn't care anymore. They didn't give a rat's behind what happened to the South Vietnamese and the Cambodians in our absense. They were safe from Selective Service, so all was right with the world. Time to have fun. That was my first and most powerful disallusionment with the Left. From what I saw, up close in the 1970s, they were the most selfish and the most shallow among us. Just selfish cowards. Not all, but the vast majority out protesting were just plain selfish cowards.
The following hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist
The GOP Congress are apparently not the only Politicians to get rattled by what they read in print.
Clearly, Cindy Lee Miller Sheehan has let the Democrat Congress know where their support base is...so to speak.
"Cut and Run" Now Out In the Open
Yes indeed!!! And, from a most so-called "Hawkish Democrat"!!! "Hawkish" and "Democrat"?!? Er. OK.
Terrorists and SUPPORTERS of Terrorism made their moves on September 11, 2001. They had expected Al Gore to win, and it was too late to change their plans...Mistake #1 and #2.
Bush "43" has allowed the Democrat Party and their SUPPORTERS to bash away...and, to attack just as foolishly. However, America is at *WAR*, and enough is enough.
"Cut and Run" Now Out In the Open
That is the nice way to put such acts of Treason, in my humble opinion. This John Murtha needs to be placed into a building like the WTC, set it on fire, and John Murtha gets to choose between burning to his death or jumping to his death. Weak males like John Murtha get pimped out to the population in Prison, so imagine what happens to such in the free-world!!! i don't care what he has done in the past, John Murtha is now clearly nothing more than a Prison *PUNK* now!!!
Former Prison Pimp
PS...'Sweet Johnnie', you are never too old to be pimped out in a Prison.
The above hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist at November 17, 2005 4:59 PM
The following hissed in response by: DDO
I will have to call BS on the denial of the Purple Heart! Unless the regulations have changed since 1969 the Purple Heart is awarded for wounds received due to enemy action. It does not matter who you were wounded by.
The following hissed in response by: mrmurph
Serious Question: Is John Murtha ill? Alzheimers? Senility?
His comments, starting in 2004 and especially today, don't sound like the comments of the Marine, pro-defense, pro-American soldier Democrat that he has appeared to be for many years.
The following hissed in response by: Dan Kauffman
As for the Vietnam Iraq comparison?
I believe it is QUITE applicable.
When this Nation endures a Catastrophic Event it undergoes a Paradigm shift, which if taken at the cusp can lead political figures to power.
Pearl Harbour was such an event and the Leaders coming out of that conflict rode it to Political Power for a generation.
Vietnam in itself was such an event and the Peace Warriors rode IT to Political Power for a Generation.
9/11 is the Catastrophic Event of our present generation and like those before them the present Old Guard, does not see it as such and are trying, as has been tried before to do what has "worked" for them for the last generation.
Iraq IS the Vietnam of the 21st Century.
I believe the Electorate is undergoing a Change of State, and things should get very interesting in the near future.
Yes Iraq is the 21st Century Vietnam, but not in the sense that the Newest Old Guard realizes. It is a new Paradigm shift in America's Psyche.
Like their Fathers before them they have not seen the
Winds of Change, they continue to wave the Bloody Shirt of Vietnam, not realizing that is now THEY who are the Old Guard hanging on to the Tiller of the Reactionary Past.
And Like those they replaced they will be replaced.
History does repeat itself.
The above hissed in response by: Dan Kauffman at November 17, 2005 6:00 PM
The following hissed in response by: Terry Gain
Dan Kaufman need not explain why Iraq is Vietnam; he need only say it is and the Dems and MSM will repeat it and it will gradually become the conventional view.
In Vietnam, America was fighting for 50% of the people who could have cared less about democracy and were over matched by the other 50 % in terms of their willingness and ability to fight.
In Iraq, America is fighting on behalf of at least 80% of the population, many of whom have risked their lives in their brave and noble attempt to establish a democracy and who have demonstrated a willingness and ability to fight for their freedom- as demonstrated by the recent liberation of Tal Afar, which, being a great success for the Iraqis, went largely unreported by the MSM.
Murtha, however, did get the memo from the Democratic party and he has shown that, like most Democrats, his devotion to his party exceeds his devotion to his country.
Iraq is now one month away from its first truly nationally elected Parliament; al Q is being devastated militarily and in terms of popular support; Sunnis have begun to turn on al Q; the insurgents are being routed in every battle with the coalition forces and the Iraqis; and the Iraqi troop strength has been built up to the point where the MNF can now implement a policy of clear and hold- as readers of the Fourth Rail understand is occurring.
The situation is now desperate. The Democrats have only about six months for America and the Iraqis to lose this war or else all will be lost (electorally) for the Democrats for the forseeable future.
This explains the increasingly concerted, shrill and dishonest attacks on the war effort in the past month.
The following hissed in response by: antimedia
Dafydd, the White House has already responded. It wasn't pretty.
Congressman Murtha is a respected veteran and politician who has a record of supporting a strong America. So it is baffling that he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party. The eve of an historic democratic election in Iraq is not the time to surrender to the terrorists. After seeing his statement, we remain baffled -- nowhere does he explain how retreating from Iraq makes America safer.You might also be interested in my research on Congressman Murtha. http://www.antimedia.us/posts/1132283909.shtml
The above hissed in response by: antimedia at November 17, 2005 8:39 PM
The following hissed in response by: Bill Faith
Is John Murtha ill? Alzheimers? Senility?
I raised a similar question in my "Hawkish" Dem: Time To Cut And Run post, wondering in particular if there's such a thing as delayed-onset PTSD. Should we be giving this guy the benefit of the doubt or simply few him with the same utter disgust we do the entire Kerry/Boxer/Moore fringe?
The above hissed in response by: Bill Faith at November 18, 2005 12:24 AM
The following hissed in response by: Dan Kauffman
"Dan Kaufman need not explain why Iraq is Vietnam; he need only say it is and the Dems and MSM will repeat it and it will gradually become the conventional view"
I followed a referall link from my blog back here it has been some time since I comented in this thread, but one thing is clear, the person who wrote the above did not even bother to READ what I wrote.
It's comical he atually acts like we are on opposite sides.
The above hissed in response by: Dan Kauffman at February 25, 2006 12:09 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)
© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved