Monday, November 21, 2005

Quick links...

Professor Bainbridge has a thread suggesting that if Bush were more open to the Democrats on strategy, they'd stop their snarking. I think that's pure baloney. In his comments I note:

It is ridiculous to believe that the left, peddling the "Bush Lied" lie, would suddenly be sated by an admission of mistakes. That is just plain bonkers. People like Michael Moore and Jimmy Carter will never work towards a common goal of improving the situation in Iraq.

Liberals hate the war in Iraq because they hate Bush, but Bush will be president for 3 more years. They will CONTINUE to hate the President, only if Bush unnecessarily admits mistakes in a gratitutous attempt to make friendly with the Democrats, the liberals will sense weakness and take it to the next notch.

The media is to blame in part, because the media is overwhelmingly liberal. They're not only peddling the stupid "Bush lied" lie, but they're also in abject failure in explaining the strategic currents in Iraq: that al-Qaeda is largely supported by Syria and Iran, and that the terrorists there are attacking Iraqis more than Americans. The media don't want to explain that Syria and Iran have an institutional interest in seeing Iraq fail as a democratic state, because they'd rather blame it all on Bush and the US Army.

What the president should do is continue to make the case that the Democrats are lying about the "Bush lied" meme, and that the media is missing the proper angle on the war.

Liberals would love this to be 1969 all over again, but after September 11, I don't think the American public is interested in that sort of idiotic love-fest. They're much more interested in KILLING TERRORISTS. And when push comes to shove and the Democrats finally cast aside their cloak and finally proclaim themselves the peacenick party (of which they always are), the people will once again reject that delusional fantasy of foreign policy in favor of a party that promotes American strength abroad.

Related to that, Ralph Peters has a column in the New York Post: How to Lose A War. He writes:

Not one of the critics of our efforts in Iraq — not one — has described his or her vision for Iraq and the Middle East in the wake of a troop withdrawal. Not one has offered any analysis of what the terrorists would gain and what they might do. Not one has shown respect for our war dead by arguing that we must put aside our partisan differences and win.

There's plenty I don't like about the Bush administration. Its domestic policies disgust me, and the Bushies got plenty wrong in Iraq. But at least they'll fight. The Dems are ready to betray our troops, our allies and our country's future security for a few House seats.

Finally, Mark Shea links to an ABC News article (warning: MSM activity) about the administration's interrogation techniques. A long discussion will certainly follow about whether the White House conducts torture. From the MSM report, though, it's clear that the administration does not believe its techniques are torture.

No comments: