home > archive > 2007 > this article

Search this site Search WWW

Islamo-fascists and the political far-left, perfect together

By Carol Devine-Molin
web posted February 26, 2007

Vice President Dick Cheney recently noted that the Congressional Democrats are essentially "validating the al-Qaida strategy" of seeking to weaken our nation's resolve – thereby undermining our ability to persevere in Iraq - which sent House Speaker Nancy Pelosi into a hissy fit. Any intelligent observer can plainly see that the Democrat Party is committed to our defeat in Iraq. But Republicans are supposed to be all hush-hush about it, lest the churlishness of Democrats be incurred. Oh, their precious little ears! Well, reality bites, doesn't it, Nancy? But there's more.

The Congressional Democrats are actually participating in their own unconventional, asymmetric tactics – a type of political "guerrilla warfare" – that's designed to slowly grind down the Iraq war effort and, by extension, our military personnel. It's been dubbed the "slow bleed". Al-Qaida would be proud. More to the point, Congressional Democrats are now waging a war of attrition against the Bush administration, and any collateral damage inflicted upon the Armed Forces is clearly secondary to the political Left. It's all about cold political calculation and "political cover". The Democrats couldn't care less about negatively impacting our troops in the process. That being said, Pelosi et al. are a bunch of fools if they think the American people will be oblivious to their shenanigans. Was one of these Democrats having an acid flash-back about the Vietnam era when they came up with this dopey scheme?

The Congressional Democrats are too craven to promptly de-fund the war and accept the political consequences from mainstream America. Heck, they want to ensure that they win elections. But they're in a tight bind, as they're required to placate their Far Left anti-war activists who wield quite a bit of power within the party. So, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman Jack Murtha at the helm, the Democrats devised this reprehensible "slow bleed" plan that's sure to backfire on them. One should always remember that the Democrats are undoubtedly crafty, but they are not wise. They are on the verge of the "McGovernization" of their party for the second time, which will remind most Americans that Democrats can't be trusted with our national security or maintaining the proper bond with our troops.

In an excellent piece by Politico.com, it's reported that: "Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to U.S. involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration's options." The article goes on to state that "Pelosi and other top Democrats are not yet prepared for an open battle with the White House over ending funding for the war, and they are wary of Republican claims that Democratic leaders would endanger the welfare of U.S. troops."

The purpose of the "slow bleed" is to provide the Congressional Democrats with ostensible plausible deniability, when the inevitable charges surface that they quashed the Iraq war effort in a wrongful power-grab and created harmful conditions for our military personnel already there. Democrat politicos intend to orchestrate a "relentless" flow of legislation aimed at restricting combat deployments, funding and training. Moreover, they're attempting to usurp the constitutional authority of the commander-in-chief and micromanage the Iraq war effort with the goal of slowly de-funding it, even if the troops are in need of reinforcements and re-supplies that would save lives and complete the mission. Sure, we can expect these hypocritical Democrats to continue their mantra that they fully "support the troops". However, the evidence is to the contrary. This "slow bleed" strategy will ultimately come back to bite the Democrat Party in the derriere because most Americans: a) understand that the political Left does not have the best interests of the military at heart, and, b) actually want a shot at winning this war. Besides, on a practical note, there aren't 60 votes in the Senate to bring about de-funding of the Iraq campaign.

Despite profound loses in the November elections, Republicans can find solace in the following: Congressional Democrats are overplaying their hand, as they're usually apt to do, and patently demonstrating their true colors – their anti-war Far-Left ideology and concomitant tactics – that only aid and abet the efforts of the Islamo-fascists, the avowed enemies of America and western civilization. And, please, let there be no misunderstanding. It's not the rank-and-file that are radicalizing the Democrat Party. Rather, it's the "Netroot" kook activists, along with the Leftist elites – most notably the Congressional Democrats, the mainstream media, the Hollywood glitterati, and the New York literati – that have moved the Democrat Party to the realm of the Far-Left.

Moreover, it should also be encouraging to Republicans that the diligent attempts by the "retreat and defeat" Congressional Democrats, to de-legitimize and de-fund the Iraq war effort are certainly not-in-sync with the philosophy of the majority of Americans. According to the results of recent polling conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, most Americans still want to complete the job in Iraq (57 percent) and believe it's still possible to attain victory (53 percent). The Democrat notion that the November elections signaled that their party had carte blanche to cut and run from Iraq, is just plain wrong. An Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that at least 60 percent of Americans oppose cutting funding to the troops. ESR

Carol Devine-Molin is a regular contributor to several online magazines.


Send a link to this page!
Send a link to this story





Site Map

E-mail ESR

Musings - ESR's blog

Submit to Digg

1996-2021, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.