Redstate

By BooBooKitty Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

I have read past articles detailing that President Bush was responsible for Hurricane Katrina and and is actually covering up the facts on global warming, so I really did not think that any other examples of BDS inspired commentary would surprise me. I was wrong. You could color me more than surprised when I read John Brummett’s column in the Las Vegas Review Journal titled It's Bush's fault that Democrats can't come up with a plan for Iraq.

It stands as a testament to the vastness and thoroughness of George W. Bush's debacle in Iraq that Democratic leaders must contort like pretzels to fashion opposition. It's as if Bush has snookered the Democrats, not with good pool-shooting, but by so damaging the table that Democrats don't have a shot.

In essence, Brummett is saying that our President has so screwed up the war in Iraq, that it is now impossible for the Democrats to salvage it. Now what seems to a trash job on the President does little to promote the intelligence of the Democrat party who can muster little more opposition to the President’s plan than politically motivated symbolic votes. In fact, it seems that Brummett is going out of his way to criticize the actions of Reid and Pelosi with this comment:

Well, it might do two other things, actually. It might signal America's lack of resolve to our enemies and distress our troops with an official stamp of congressional disapproval back home. But that surely won't come as news to anybody.

While I am sure that this sort of perverted reasoning long ago lost its power to raise more than an eyebrow of most conservatives, I think there may be more here than meets the eye.

In summary, Democrats are positioned to get shared blame -- unfairly, sure -- when in the end, whenever that end comes, America leaves Iraq in what will be wholly Bush's folly and failure… With the war subsequently revealed to have been waged on false pretenses, and when that war becomes hopelessly stalemated, it is the role and responsibility of the duly authorized warrior, the president as commander in chief, to possess the good sense to cut his country's tragic losses… The opposing party dare not take away funding for actively engaged troops… The best responsible course for the opposing party is to run somebody better for president at the very next opportunity, which ought to be easy enough.

So what it is John, are we to cut and run or stay and fight?

It sounds like the beginning of a whole new meme to me, one of those things that will be a known fact ™ by the time the 2008 election rolls around. I mean if things are so screwed up in Iraq then the next President may have no other choice than pull out… or stay involved out of tragic necessity. Perhaps this is the convenient alibi for when a Democrat Presidential candidate has to explain her position to the grassroots antiwar establishment?

Did I mention that Brummett is a Clinton diarist; I wonder who he would support as our next “duly authorized warrior”?

Cross posted at The Minority Reportand The Hinzsight Report