Well.. I rest my case.
Not that this hasn’t been discussed by many, many others, but I think it deserves at least a brief mention here: Given the choice between victory for the US or victory for the Democrat Party, some would choose Party over country:
From WAPO: House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party’s efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.
Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be “a real big problem for us.”
Perhaps I am misinterpreting… but it sure sounds like he is saying that positive news out of Iraq would be a real problem for the Democrats. Could that be because they are really counting on failure in Iraq translating into votes in 2008?
|
|
|
|