True...

Apparently, the Democrats aren't sure which General they want Bush to listen to..

5-6 months ago, they wanted Bush to listen to Petraeus..

Now that Bush has and things are actually going good in Iraq, NOW the Democrats say that Petraeus is a "liar" and has "betrayed" the US and all sorts of other vile garbage..

Another example of the Democratic Party and their ever-busy Goal Post Moving business....

Michale.....

So, I guess that means the Democratic Party is shopping around for a General that they think will fail..
~~~~~

Hmmmm, unless there's been an impeachment while I was sleeping, the democrats have no say over which general is in charge of Iraq ... what is Petraeus, Bush's fifth or so?

I agree completely..

So, I guess that means the Democratic Party is shopping around for a General that they think will fail..

Seriously though.. The problem with your assertion is that we're talking about the SAME General.

The Democratic Party wanted Bush to listen to General Petraeus at the beginning of the surge when they (the Dems) thought for sure that the surge would fail.. Now that EVERYONE agrees the surge is working, they want to disregard the advice of the very same General...

Funny how that is, eh??

Michale.....

Primaries are won on the Left and Right. General elections are won in the middle. That’s the problem Petraeus poses for Democrats. If he could convince MoveOn, this would be easy. But he can’t and won’t. The danger is that he convinces folks in the middle that it would be irresponsible to simply pull out troops now, rather than trying to stabilize the situation further, that there is enough improvement both politically and militarily at the grass roots level to follow his schedule, rather than a Democratic one, that he knows what is happening on the ground in Iraq better than people who aren’t there.

My comment: This is what the Democrats SAID they wanted Bush to do.. Follow the advice of the generals

The risk for Democrats is that those who take him on will be seen as naïve or weak or beholden to the Cindy Sheehans, which is not a direct route to the Oval Office. The other risk is that those who don’t will be attacked and belittled for failing to do so, and will never make it to the finals in this contest. It was a whole lot easier when this was just Bush’s war.

Oh how I love to see the Democrats squirm over this...

Hoisted by their own Petard...

The Democrats said, "Let's give Bush and Petraeus til Sep. That will give them MORE rope to hang themselves..."

Too bad for the Democrats that the "rope" is now a lifeline for the Bush Administration and it looks like it will also be the "Hanging Rope" for the Democrats...

It will be interesting to see if the Democrats can get out of the corner they have painted themselves into..

Michale.....

Now that things are going good and the surge IS working, the Democrats don't want to listen to General Patreus anymore..

Strange how the Democratic Party wants to listen to General Patreus, but only if they think he is going to fail..

Seems to be a pattern developing...

Democrats move the goal posts when the surge starts saving American lives...

Then, they don't want to listen to the SUCCESSFUL General, but DID want to listen when they thought he would fail...

Just who'se side is the Democratic Party on???

Michale.....

On another note, I guess Senate Democrats have decided that they, and not the generals in theater, know the best strategy for Iraq...

Guess what.. That will make the Iraq War fully and completely owned by the Democrats...

Which is probably what the GOP wanted all along...

Michale.....

You know, you're right. The problem I always had with Picard is the exact same problem I have with the Democrats.

"Mr. Worf, we will retire to my ready room to discuss the attacking vessel using chess metaphors, liberally quoting Shakespeare while we banter."

...could have come out of the mouths of many Democrats currently in office, in one form or another.

Sigh.

Camille Paglia is always a hoot to read. I disagree with her about as often as I agree, and she does tend to pick some academic battles I could care less about, but she's always fun to read.

-CW

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/09/12/craig/?source=whitelist

While it is ostensibly a slam against the GOP and, to a certain extent is right, I think it's interesting what she says about the Democratic Party..

To sum things up... While she slams the GOP for the over-bearing and heavy-handed approach to the war on terror, she also takes the Democratic Party to task for their plan-less, half-witted and mealy-mouth approach.. Those are my adjectives, not hers, but I think it accurately portrays the point Ms Paglia was trying to convey..

A while back, when STAR TREK:THE NEXT GENERATION may Ron Moore and Rene Echeverria burn in hell!!) debuted there was a huge TV Guide spread about the differences between Capt James T Kirk and Capt Jean Luc Picard and many polls were taken.. When asked who would they want to have spearheading a diplomatic initiative, overwhelmingly (not surprising) the general public choose Capt Picard. But when asked who would they most want to command troops in battle, the choice was (again, not surprisingly) Capt James T Kirk....

My point??

The Democratic Party is Capt Picard.. The GOP is Capt Kirk...

The American Public wants... No... NEEDS Capt Kirk at the helm... When ass is sufficiently kicked, then Capt Picard can come in make sure everyone makes nice and plays well with others...

Michale.....

I have been saying this since Sep 2006 that THAT is the biggest problem the Democratic Party has..

They don't have a plan.. For ANYTHING... They just figure that their right and everyone else HAS to see it, so why bother coming up with a plan??

I also agree with you that a lot of the stuff you post above is a "no brainer" to anyone with a modicum of political sense..

So, this brings us back to the question I put in your previous commentary..

WHY ARE THE DEMOCRATS acting like the GOP??

Only 2 possibilities make any sense..

1. They have been politically castrated by the GOP...

2. Due to information they have that the general public is not privy to, the Democrats realize that, in this case, the "Bush Doctrine" is the right doctrine.

I would love to see that second possibility explored more.. It IS possible that the Administration and Congress have intel that is so frightening and catastrophic that it is forcing Democrats to toe the line with Bush and just giving half-hearted lip service to appease the anti-war crowd...

One really has to wonder what could possibly be so bad that the Democratic Party would sell their political souls for...

Michale.....