Dems’ Woe: It’s Not Easy Being Sleazy
With Army Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker set to testify to Congress about the war in Iraq Monday, Democrats face a touchy political problem — how do you attack what Petraeus and Crocker are saying without attacking them personally?
And further, can you do that without looking like you’re dissing the 170,000 U.S. troops in Iraq?
Petraeus, who began his military career in 1970 as a freshman at West Point, was unanimously approved by the Senate as the top U.S. commander in Iraq in late January, and he has years of positive press clippings to back up his outsized reputation.
In fact, recent internal Republican polling shows that a full three-quarters of Americans know who Petraeus is — and he enjoys solid, if unspectacular, approval ratings of 36 percent favorable to 16 unfavorable unfavorable, according to GOP insiders.
The Senate didn’t even hold a roll-call vote on the well-respected Crocker’s nomination as U.S. ambassador to Iraq, instead approving it by voice vote on March 7. Crocker has served in Iraq previously — as well as Pakistan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Iran and Syria — since joining the foreign service in 1971.
So Democrats will have to walk a fine line — they must undermine what Petraeus and Crocker are saying without looking like they are personally impugning either man.
“It is always dangerous to go after a general or ambassador,” acknowledged a top House Democratic leadership aide, “but things haven’t really changed in Iraq, and we need to demonstrate that to the American public.”
According to news reports on Friday, Petraeus will recommend to President Bush, who touted his “surge” strategy in his radio address Saturday, that there be only a token drawdown of one combat brigade with 3,500 to 4,500 troops, early next year, with further withdrawals throughout the year, depending on the security situation within Iraq. And the stories in The New York Times and The Washington Post brought an immediate rebuke from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
“The stay-the-course strategy by Gen. Petraeus and the president to leave all troops in Iraq has been rejected by the American people,” she said in a sharply worded statement.
Pelosi’s comments are an example of the half-dozen tactics being used by Democratic leaders to rebut Petraeus and Crocker, including:
– Going after the president, rather than Petraeus or Crocker — an approach already being used extensively.
Pelosi called the upcoming Petraeus-Crocker report “the Bush Report” during a press conference Wednesday. And during the Democratic radio address Saturday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) accused the White House of having “cherry-picked” the data coming out of Iraq in order to buttress its position on the war.
“He’s made a number of statements over the years that have not proved to be factual,” Reid said of the general Friday. “I have every belief that this good man, General Petraeus, will give us what he feels is the right thing to do in the report that is now not his report. It’s President Bush’s report.”
“– Focusing on the recent National Intelligence Estimate, as well as General Accountability Office and Gen. James Jones’ reports on Iraq.
Already being pushed by Democrats, this strategy has been highly effective, though Republican lawmakers have tried to counter the move. The NIE, released in July, said Al Qaeda was back and likely as strong as ever, while the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, challenged the Pentagon’s assertion that violence is down in Iraq and pointed out the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has been unable to meet 15 of the 18 benchmarks it set for itself. And former NATO Commander Jones, who headed up an independent commission, found Iraqi security forces unable to take over for the Americans for another 12 to 18 months.
All of this makes a very sobering response to the positive news Petraeus and Crocker are expected to report.
– Pointing out the lack of political reconciliation in Iraq — something nearly all parties acknowledge, to one degree or another.
Even Petraeus himself allowed in a letter to U.S. troops, released Friday, the “surge” was supposed to reduce sectarian violence so that Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish leaders inside Iraq could forge a political compromise on controversial issues, like an oil revenue-sharing law and holding provincial elections. But those goals have so far eluded al-Maliki and others political leaders there. And it’s not clear when, or if, they’ll be reached.
“One of the justifications of the surge, after all, was that it would help create the space for Iraqi leaders to tackle the tough questions and agree on key pieces of national reconciliation legislation,” Petraeus wrote. “It has not worked out as we had hoped.”
– Portraying Petraeus and Crocker as “just following orders.”
Democrats point out that Petraeus and Crocker report to Bush, not Congress, and are thus just obeying his directions.
“At the end of the day, these are not totally independent, free agents,” said Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee. “They are an appendage of the administration.”
– Being respectful but challenging everything.
“I would hope that Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus would be the first to concede that they have no monopoly on wisdom,” noted Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and co-author of the Senate Democrats’ withdrawal plan for Iraq. “I think [Petraeus and Crocker] would admit that these judgments are difficult judgments, that the factors that they are considering — that they might not have the same perspective that we have.”
– Letting the anti-war groups take on Petraeus or Crocker.
These groups have no problem going after Petraeus, as evidenced by heavy criticism of him by Americans Against Escalation in Iraq (“It is clear that Americans cannot trust any assessments that come out of this White House, or Gen. Petraeus when it comes to the war in Iraq”) and the Center for American Progress, among others. But it is a tactic that Democratic lawmakers themselves want to avoid.
“No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,” noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. “The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.”
Republicans, though, were quick to dismiss the Democratic strategy as a desparate maneuver.
“Defaming and impugning the integrity of a commanding, four-star general as he returns from the front lines of war is reprehensible, and Democratic leaders should put a stop to it at once,” declared House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio). “These comments do a disservice to the tens of thousands of American military families whose loved ones are under his command and serve no constructive purpose whatsoever in moving our troops closer to victory in Iraq.”
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Dems,
How about just admitting that:
1. You are not capable of providing for this nations’s security, nor willing to provide for it.
2. Your words and actions constitute treason, and you all resign immediately.
No, wait, that would require some things that the Dems are not capable of: honesty, integrity, and loyalty to America.
What was I thinking?
September 9th, 2007 at 12:42 pmThe General has served under Republican and Democratic administrations and has made it this far by being straight with them. Can’t wait for the Dems to stumble over their tongues.
September 9th, 2007 at 12:48 pmAAARRGGHHH!! You fucking stupid mother fuckers! Gosh! Fucking Biden, Pelosi and them rest of the Dem(on)’s can piss off!!!! Just slit my throat now and get it over with!!
September 9th, 2007 at 12:57 pmre:
Defaming and impugning the integrity of a commanding, four-star general as he returns from the front lines of war is reprehensible, and Democratic leaders should put a stop to it at once,” declared House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio)
>>>> I do not want them to stop it, let the jackasses bray; the whole world needs to hear what they say
September 9th, 2007 at 1:23 pm@ Birdddog -
your talking about the wrong throat being slit
September 9th, 2007 at 1:27 pm“He’s made a number of statements over the years that have not proved to be factual,” Reid said of the general Friday. “I have every belief that this good man, General Petraeus, will give us what he feels is the right thing to do in the report that is now not his report. It’s President Bush’s report.” ”
That’s a little of shit talk from a small man who makes a living on making statements that are not “factual”…such as “the war is lost”.
Someone needs to issue Harry Weed a new tinfoil hat.
September 9th, 2007 at 1:27 pmGo on, fuckers! Show everyone your true nature and call Petraeus a liar! No need to hide it! We already know you’re a bunch of fucking traitors anyway.
September 9th, 2007 at 1:38 pm@ Steve in NC —— I want it slit before the Jihadist’s do it. Are the Dem’s just that fucking retarded or am I just going crazy? Trying to not even listen to the report before it even comes out…WTF. Those bastards aren’t even going to listen, they are going to ask worthless questions and try to make the General look bad. Mother fuckers!
September 9th, 2007 at 1:43 pmAAAAGGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!! My fucking head is going to explode. If I wasn’t a red blooded america loving patriot, I would want a bomb dropped on washington. The Defeatocrats obviously want us to lose this solely so they can feel good about their power grabbing,and the damn Republicans just sit there and let them do it without reprocussions. Time for a new set of legislators. Problem with that is so many of the voting population has their heads so far up their asses watching american idol, or the “Real World”, that they have no clue as to what is really going on, or what road these idiots in washington are taking us down. I just want walk down the streets and slap everybody around and say “Wake up idiot! Don’t you see what’s going on! Get your head out of your ass!” Geeez.
September 9th, 2007 at 1:48 pmActually for them, it is easy being sleazy, it’s trying to hide their true treasonous nature that is hard.
They have lot’s of help from the leftist media, ignorant lazy special interest groups in line for their ‘entitlements’, and brainwashed victims of public school indoctrination.
What is really disappointing is that they were voted in.
September 9th, 2007 at 2:22 pm[…] Dems’ Woe: It’s Not Easy Being Sleazy […]
September 9th, 2007 at 2:39 pmAnd this from the tinfoilers in the anti-war movement who have been thus far been (and I quote here) “stymied”:
September 9th, 2007 at 5:06 pmhttp://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5723.html
Good analysis of the Democratic anti-surge. It doesn’t have to be valid, just apparently coherent enough to provide cover. The $64trillion question is whether the non-fringe public is buying. I think it was Baird who counselled Petraeus to give a network a one-hour presentation of the whole scenario, triumphs, blockages, beauty spots and warts. Bypass the bloviators.
BTW, “disparate” or “desperate”. Pick one.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:43 pmNone of what the democrats are trying to do right now would be needed if we had a media that actually did its job. The people would have acurate on the ground information about the surge, not bullshit spin by politicians so either way if they were right then they wouldnt have to spin and if they were wrong then they would be called out for the liars they are. Funny how they openly admit smearing the man before he even speaks a word, how these people sleep at night I do not know.
September 9th, 2007 at 6:38 pm“I think [Petraeus and Crocker] would admit that these judgments are difficult judgments, that the factors that they are considering — that they might not have the same perspective that we have.”
No shit sherlock. You are willing to commit any treason, tell any lie, defame better men and then give aid and comfort to our enemies for the furtherance of your D’rat Party’s greed for power. “I hope that you die and I hope that it’s soon. I’ll follow your casket on a pale afternoon”
September 9th, 2007 at 6:44 pmto piss on your grave.
Clyde Conneer:
I’ll follow after you. I think a more appropriate response would be to take a dump and use his headstone as a place to wipe?
September 9th, 2007 at 7:12 pm