Hamilton, Madison, and Jay

This blog is devoted to a variety of topics including politics, current events, legal issues, and we even take the time to have some occasional fun. After all, blogging is about having a little fun, right?

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Rove -- "Democrats still weak on security"

Yes, while the "eeeeevil genius" has left the White House, he is still working, and Rove is spot on with this piece in today's Wall Street Journal. Democrats can't deny the figures he provides with regard to the war, though they might try covering their ears and ignoring them:

One out of five is not a majority. Democrats should keep that simple fact of political life in mind as they pursue the White House.

For a party whose presidential candidates pledge they'll remove U.S. troops from Iraq immediately upon taking office -- without regard to conditions on the ground or the consequences to America's security -- a late February Gallup Poll was bad news. The Obama/Clinton vow to pull out of Iraq immediately appears to be the position of less than one-fifth of the voters.

Only 18% of those surveyed by Gallup agreed U.S. troops should be withdrawn "on a timetable as soon as possible." And only 20% felt the surge was making things worse in Iraq. Twice as many respondents felt the surge was making conditions better.

It gets worse for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Nearly two out of every three Americans surveyed (65%) believe "the United States has an obligation to establish a reasonable level of stability and security in Iraq before withdrawing all of its troops." The reason is self-interest. Almost the same number of Americans (63%) believe al Qaeda "would be more likely to use Iraq as a base for its terrorist operations" if the U.S. withdraws.

Just a year ago it was almost universally accepted that Iraq would wreck the GOP chances in November. Now the issue may pose a threat to the Democratic efforts to gain power. For while the American people are acknowledging the positive impact of the surge, Democratic leaders are not.
In September, Mrs. Clinton told Gen. David Petraeus "the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief." This week, she said "we'll be right back at square one" in Iraq by this summer.

In December, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid refused to admit progress, arguing, "The surge hasn't accomplished its goals." He said a month earlier there was "no progress being made in Iraq" and "it is not getting better, it is getting worse."

Asked by CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Feb. 9 if she was worried that the gains of the last year might be lost, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot back: "There haven't been gains . . . This is a failure." Carl Levin, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee told the Associated Press the same month that the surge "has failed."

This passionate, persistent unwillingness to admit what more and more Americans are coming to believe is true about Iraq's changing situation puts Democrats in dangerous political territory. For one thing, they increasingly appear out of touch with reality, a charge they made with some success at the administration's expense before the surge began changing conditions in Iraq.

The steady drumbeat of "quagmire," "failure," and withdrawal has gone on since the end of major combat operations in Iraq. Democrats were demanding that everything be perfect when that came around, which is just simply nutter; a definitive lack of reality. We had to fix Iraq. We had to train their troops and police. We had to help their government get back on it's feet. Now that we're accomplishing this, the Democrats worst fear has come to pass.

There is success over there and people know it. Know how people know that things are going well over in Iraq? Because the media quit reporting on Iraq. Now, we're lucky to hear of a car bombing or an IED attack, or the death of US soldiers maybe once a week. There's nary a peep out of the MSM on Iraq. "If it bleeds it leads," and nothing's doing a lot of bleeding over there right now.

The media has even refused to report on the political successes being made by the Iraqi government. Last year the only thing Pelosi, Reid, and the media could harp on was that the Iraqis went into a month-long recess, and left unfinished business on the table. (They ignored military reports that the Iraqis went on recess while the Surge troops ramped up their security operations. When they completed that, the Iraqi Parliament went back into session, and have been working hard ever since.)

The point Mr. Rove is making is that the Democrats are going to lose badly if they keep this up. The polls are showing a significant shift on the issue of Iraq, and on the war, in general. John McCain has wasted little time in pointing out the failings in both Obama's and Clinton's talking points about Iraq. He will make this a campaign with a heavy emphasis on national security and staying on offense in this war. That has been a Democrat weakness for almost forty years, and given the two stooges on the Left, it doesn't look like they're going to shed that image anytime soon.

Publius II


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home