Doubt and Redoubt

The chairman of the DNC says, “We can’t win,” and “I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for…” (Please, please God don’t let Dean be forced to resign!)

You’d expect yesteryear’s (patriotic and pro-American) Democratic party to be saying things like, “He’s doing damage to the ability of Democrats to wage a national campaign.” But they’re not. They are saying this about Lieberman who dared to speak in support of the troops AND the mission.

"It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be commander in chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril," said Lieberman, urging bipartisan cooperation. mercurynews

Shocking. Utterly shocking statements from a Senator in a time of war! Why, to actually come out and say this when Democrats are 'putting a strategy together'? Lieberman is, "undercutting their effort to forge a consensus on the war." That consensus being that our troops have been defeated. That we can't win. That it's best we pull out immediately and declare the Iraq war, "immoral, illegal, and unwinnable."

In public statements and a newspaper column, Lieberman has argued that Bush has a strategy for victory in Iraq, has dismissed calls for the president to set a timetable for troop withdrawal, and has warned that it would be a "colossal mistake" for the Democratic leadership to "lose its will" at this critical point in the war. washingtonpost.com

My observation has been that the left has chosen a deliberate strategy of trying to weaken domestic support for the war purely for partisan political advantage. An observation borne out everyday by their own statements and actions.

"He's doing damage to the ability of Democrats to wage a national campaign," said Ken Dautrich, a University of Connecticut public policy professor. "It's Lieberman being Lieberman. And it's frustrating for people trying to put a Democratic strategy together."

Sensing political vulnerability in Bush's handling of Iraq, Democrats are anxious to craft a compelling anti-war theme uniting the party for the pivotal midterm congressional elections.

Democrats hope a surging anti-war tide in 2006 can help them shatter the GOP's 12-year lock on the House and win back the Senate for the first time since 2001.

"It's not a tidal wave now, but the ingredients are starting to fall into place," said veteran Democratic strategist Tad Devine. mercurynews

Instead of criticizing Lieberman they should be praising him, and following his example! The Democratic Party is now in thrall to the most partisan left-wing elements of their party. What patriotic American in their right mind would believe that ensuring failure in Iraq would catapult them to power? And once in power, what kind of policy would they have endorsed? "When it gets tough, we run." Which is ok, because the other half of leftist foreign policy is that America shouldn't be a superpower. In their hands, it won't be.

And so, the 'forging of a consensus on the war' is going forward. Stage left: Cindy Sheehan, the icon of the New Vietnam Strategy, is overseas on a mission to undercut America and stand in solidarity with insurgents in Iraq.

The scheduled speakers included Sheehan, who has become a focus of anti-war sentiment in the United States by camping outside the Texas ranch of President George W. Bush; Hasan Zergani Hashim, a spokesperson for Iraq's radical Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr; and leftist British legislator George Galloway. yahoo.com

The enemy of my enemy is my friend?

The culture of arrogance

As Joe Lieberman knows, if you criticize the left's position you will be 'attacked'. The irony is that, for some on the left, free speech and putting forward your opinion only works in one direction. Calling Bush a liar, an incompetent, or worse, and the war lost and hopeless is just expressing your opinion, but disagreement or defending a policy you agree with is 'arrogance' and 'attempting to shut people up'. Sadly, this tactic is itself an attempt to shut down conversation and make sure that only their view is heard.

"Some Democrats said I was being a traitor," he said in an interview on Friday, adding that he was not surprised by the reaction, "given the depth of feeling about the war." nytimes sucks (registration required)

What is arrogant is formulating a political stategy based on the premise that America needs to lose so that you can win. What is arrogant is voting for a war and then undermining it while it is underway and calling the President divisive for continuing to support the policy you voted for. (Or is that hubris? Arrogance just doesn't convey the element of darwinian defeat that inevitably comes from these kinds of leftist self-defeating policies.)

In the end, it is evident that the anti-war movement is the last redoubt of failed leftist ideology.

[H]egemonic Word count: 819