Democrat Counter-Offer: 100 Years Of Capitulation

as opposed to 100 years of war...apparently

By haystack Posted in | | | | | Comments (53) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

[Via Politico, we have the forming of the Dem strategy for beating McCain in November:

John McCain is scheduled to deliver a major foreign policy speech Wednesday in Los Angeles, one with a heavy Iraq focus, but chances are Democrats won’t be listening. They’ve already distilled his views into an easy to remember formulation: 100 years of war.

It is a reference to an offhand remark made by McCain in January about the possible duration of the U.S. presence in Iraq, a comment that Democrats now portray as the equivalent of the McCain Doctrine.

McCain Doctrine...hunh. Has a sorta nice ring to it, dontchathink? I certainly like it better than the Obama Doctrine...the Obamatrine...of "Tuck Tail and Run."

Citing Obama's remarks on the 5th Anniversary of our presence in Iraq, Politico suggests the "real" hammer the Democrats will likely be swinging appears to something more like 100 years of capitulation:

Instead of offering an exit strategy for Iraq, he’s offering us a 100 year occupation.

Exit strategy is a great buzz word, and Occupation gets all the new generation of hippies chanting something incoherent about Attica, but as McCain reminded us in the REAL quote, we're 60 years running with a presence in Japan and Germany...50 in Korea...how is Iraq (long-term) different? Oh, that's right-there are still bad guys in Iraq with guns and explosives. We need to get the heck outta Dodge until there are no more bad guys. Why on earth would we have Soldiers doing the work of Soldiers where there is currently a need for...Soldiers?

When will we hear Barry and Hill demand an exit strategy in these places? September? October?

More below the fold..

Politico reminds us further down in the piece that McCain's original quote (mysteriously bastardized by the Left) meant to point out we are in lots of places around the world, and have been for a very long time:

...in response to a New Hampshire town hall questioner who asked about President Bush’s statement that U.S. troops could be in Iraq for 50 years, McCain interrupted and said, "Make it 100."

"We've been in South Korea . . . we’ve been in Japan for 60 years," he continued. "We’ve been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That would be fine with me. As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, that’s fine with me. I hope that would be fine with you, if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where al-Qaeda is training, recruiting and equipping and motivating people every single day."

The Democrats know there is a difference between an American presence in a foreign county, some of whom wear the Uniform, where we provide support and service...and watch out for our own best interests in security and intelligence...and an "Occupation." But this "straight talk" contradicts what the Democrats would have us believe. Leaving Iraq and negotiating with terrorists suits the Democrats just fine.

They are making clear what they mean to do with McCain in the General:

While reporters may have let up on the issue, Democrats have not.

“This is the middle of an entrenched, ethnic, religious, guerrilla war. The idea to stick it out for 100 years before they settle it is crazy on the substance and insane on the tactics,” said Jonathan Prince, a Democratic strategist who helped run John Edwards’ presidential campaign.

Regardless of what McCain meant, Democrats view his remark as a rare opportunity to define him early enough in the campaign to make the charges stick.

“It’s seldom you get such a clean shot. It’s such a remarkably clean shot,” said a senior Obama adviser, who asked that his name be withheld so that he could be candid. The “'100 years' comment is a frame,” the adviser explained, to nail home the message that McCain is “more of the same.”

Except he isn't more of the same, no matter how hard they will TRY to frame the debate to the contrary. McCain spoke up for MORE troops earlier in the game, and has taken a lot of cheap shots at the President and his SecDefs all throughout the war. It ain't gonna fly kids...but we get to the punch line on "page 2."

McCain's camp intends to “show the public that there is a way out of there without the worst consequences befalling us ... then you can re-earn their patience to do that.” You guessed it; Democrats have something different in mind:

Democrats plan a constant drumbeat on the comment, hoping to brand McCain as a dangerous choice at an already unstable time in the world, with mild echoes of Lyndon Johnson's 1964 campaign against Barry Goldwater.

McCain’s quip at a campaign stop last year, when he sang “bomb, bomb Iran” to the tune of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann” has only aided Democrats efforts to paint him as a warmonger. By highlighting McCain’s general hawkishness and his "100 years" remark, Democrats hope to create an entirely new narrative about McCain for the general election.

“[The comment alone] doesn’t yet do the job,” Prince said. “That is going to have to happen by redefining the image that John McCain has built up very well over decades: as a free-thinking, nonpartisan, independent, honest maverick.”

“But,” he added, “it’s an opening.”

So, if I have this straight, the plan is to redefine everything McCain HAS said and done over the years into something he hasn't...and THEN redefine everything he says he WILL do into something he won't. If they can do THAT, why, they just might pull this thing off!

Why don't they just run on why they're so much better instead of why McCain isn't? Nevermind...that was a rhetorical question.

Remember the Democrat motto:

Why fight for something you believe in when you can just take it away from those who have it already, and give it to those who wouldn’t know what to do with it if they DID?

« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims?Comments (2) | Quote of the Day, with a digression.Comments (0) »
Democrat Counter-Offer: 100 Years Of Capitulation 53 Comments (0 topical, 53 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

absentee

Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus

*“It’s seldom you get such a clean shot. It’s such a remarkably clean shot,” said a senior Obama adviser*
What a great quote! When republicans talk about a "clean shot" it's usually in reference to the real enemy and not at a political opponent. If the Dems had any sense at all they'd be just as strong on national security as the R's. Then maybe they'd have a shot at some crossover votes.

*McCain’s quip at a campaign stop last year, when he sang “bomb, bomb Iran” to the tune of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann” has only aided Democrats efforts to paint him as a warmonger.*
Remember kiddies, War is bad for any reason and there's never a good enough reason to go to war.
Every time the left attacks him, McCain looks better and better.
"WE SURRENDER!" the democrats motto since the 1970's

"You never need a firearm,until you need it BADLY!"

Yes, let's please have this discussion with the dems.

On the one side of the screen we have a decorated war hero that d*mn near gave his life for his country and has continued to serve upon returning home.

On the other side, we have an opportunist that has sat his scrawny a** in a Hate America church for almost 20 years and has sympathized with known terrorists.

I can see the ads now. John McCain descending the aircraft after 5 years in a Vietnamese prison camp on one side and Jeremiah and Barack together on the other side with shrills of G-d America playing over and over. How's that for a frame?

As for bombing Iran, well, I'd have made a glass parking lot out of the whole place by now. But nobody seemed to ask me. :>)

his scrawny ass? The maturity level on this site is amazing.

As for the fact that the thought of murdering over 65 million people brings a smile to your face (or at least brings you to take the time to make a big-nosed emoticon)- I think really says a lot about how sick you really are.

It looks like the moral authority of righteous indignation is awake and reporting for duty.

Seriously newbie, you need to read and learn a bit before you shoot your little comments. To do otherwise is just silly.

Or...maybe I had this weird opinion that the posting rules applied to everyone...

"Profanity is not necessary to make a point, add emphasis, or convey a message. There are plenty of other places on the 'net to be vulgar and base, but RedState will not be one of them."

But hey, if the eradication of an entire country of people is this site's cup 'o tea, so be it. Says a lot about the kind of person you are, that's all.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

We have come down upon people in the past for making them, both because it's not appropriate for this site, and because it allows people like psugrad to toss around posts chock-full of moral righteousness.

Speaking of psugrad: your next post will be an apology to c17wife for offering her direct insult.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Thank you. Will be done.

Wednesday....I've seen some of your best work on Friday :)

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

I was merely replying to the nonsensical spectacle the dems will try to make out of a single comment. Nothing more nothing less. That is why I qualified it and smiled.
Anyone in their right mind would know that nuking Iran would be a very, very bad thing.

...are in their right minds? :)

Moe

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

imlying profanity with special keyboard characters is not mentioned in the posting rules. Folks such as yourself have a decent record of "finding" a rule where it is not...heard of the Constitution?

And, by the way, you actually spelled out the word you were offended to see implied here.

One more thing, eradication of a Country? Like I said, you're in for a long day.

Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus

"scrawny ass" = "special keyboard characters"

You're hilarious. Where's everyone else defending the nuclear destruction of all of Iran?

I want to be clear that I'm not advocating a random first strike on Iran, a nuclear strike should not be ruled out. As a matter of fact, it should be clearly on the table.

If the Iranians get nuclear capability they would likely bomb Israel. There is some lesser probability they might use the weapons against US interests in the ME (think Iraq). There is an excellent probability that the weapons would find their way into the hands of Hezbollah/Hamas or al Qaeda.

Bottom line, the Iranians need to have no question in their fertile little minds that we would remove them from the face of the earth and make their major population centers uninhabitable for the next 10,000 years or so.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Maybe I'm being picky, but I categorize a tactical nuclear strike on Iran's military infrastructure (which I'd support) as a completely separate animal from making a "glass parking lot out of the whole place" (which I feel would put us in a whole hell of a lot worse situation than we find ourselves in now).

Read and learn. Rinse, read, and repeat.

I would be opposed to a small scale tactical strike. I would cut off the head of the beast, which would require large scale strikes to not only take out 100% of their military capability, 100% of their economy (which would really only require knocking out their refineries), their ports and, most of all, 100% of their political infrastructure.

Again, I would not do this arbitrarily, but in response to a well documented threat of use of use of WMDs on the part of the Iranians. I would not wait for Tel Aviv to be bombed OTOH. And I know that "the world" would have a hissy fit as would the Democrats. I really don't give a rats patoot about any of them or their opinions. I do care that the Islamofascists understand that we will go to whatever lengths we need to in order to protect our nation, our people and US interests in general. They understand force. I would would show them force.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Now there's a sight for the terrorists to fear.

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.Let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."-Barry Goldwater
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

Franz, Prince of Dogness added Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff to his list of accomplishments.

We wouldn't have to bomb anyone. We would have the equivalent of a Marine Expeditionary Unit only it would be manned will little white dogs. Very mean, nasty, little white dogs. Parachute them into a "hot zone" they would kill and eat everyone in sight. No fallout. On a long term security basis, the enemy would be awake every night listening for the "GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR" sound coming out of the night sky.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

The image of the parachuting white dogs is best one of the day.

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.Let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."-Barry Goldwater
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

Although I was being glib above. Every once in a while I ask hubby in a sinister little voice if the nukes wouldn't just be easier. He looks hard at me, laughs, and then says "No, woman, it wouldn't." And then he reminds me that women are irrational and should never be allowed to be anywhere close to "the button". And then I punch him, and it all goes down hill from there. But, that's TMI for this place. :>)

TMFI! ;o)

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies
-- Frank J

My bad- I'm sure you didn't really mean that comment about turning Iran into a parking lot.

...attempts to define him as something he isn't, we can do our part by defining Obama as something he is, a defeatist when it comes to Iraq, who as president would preside over a timed surrender plan. He fired the advisor who said Obama would listen to the generals, and his website is pretty clear that he will withdraw most of our troops in sixteen months.

1. McCain, 2. Thompson, 3. Giuliani, 4. Romney

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies
-- Frank J

exactly what his plan is for the fubar he will leave behind after a hasty withdrawal.

...in the Democratic Camp. FDR, HST, and JFK, all known advocates of a strong United States military and a robust foreign policy, died long ago. The Democratic party that lead the victory parades down America's Main Avenues sixty three years ago was usurped by Communist elements and sympathizers in the mid to late sixties. Repeat Eugene McCarthy, Hubert Humphrey, Robert McNamara, William Chester Goodfellow, and Medea Benjamin sixty three times each please, then repeat Socialism 'uber alles' the same number of times.
Like the children's fairy tale of the ants busily preparing for the approaching long winter while the grasshopper merrily fiddles away outside their nest, the Democrats are reluctant to interrupt their festivities, dancing and frolicking in the all male conga line, for something as trivial as defending Democracy, Liberty, and Western Civilization.
The Democrats are quite good at conveniently forgetting little historical vignettes when it suits their purpose, such as the fact that Neville Chamberlain's unflinching pursuit of peace at any price, culminating in that spectacular act of inanity in Munich, September, 1938 made WWII and the deaths of fifty million people inevitable. Most reasonably intelligent, sane people would take extreme caution not to wander into that same mine field again, but the Democrats like the indolent grasshopper fiddling away, are throwing any semblence of caution to the wind in their headlong pursuit of politcal power.
It took six long years of bloodshed and carnage to kill 50,000,000 people, 1939-1945. We can do that same number in the first 30 minute exchange today.

There shouldn't be any need for cars to park in a giant pile of rubble. Course, I would have dropped all sorts of bombs on them long ago, but like you said, no one seems to ask us...::smile::

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.Let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."-Barry Goldwater
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

Who I'd bomb. Of course being a neo-con means I have to ask my higher ups first, you know...the Joooooooooos. Also, on a happy note, the noe con conspiracy means I really get to be invovled in the two big operations, the neo-con takeover that RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul!RonPaul! has said I've done, and then on the other side of the aisle, I'm still part of the VRWC. Ah, it's good to be King. :-)

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.Let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."-Barry Goldwater
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

Is good, but it is better when you can defeat him without a battle. Bombing likely will simply exacerbate the problem - and I know you both are being snarky.

I would suggest two books for your reading pleasure "the Art of War" by Sun Tzu or "On War" by Clausewitz. Heck, throw in "The Prince" by Machiavelli as well.

Erik

Since when did a "clean shot" equate with "completely distorting"? It's not like McCain had to go back and clarify later, he elaborated in his next sentence.

Obama, just another politician.

___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.

Not that you need it but I feel compelled to do so anyway. I am a newbie here (registered a couple of weeks ago) but I have been reading the posts for quite some time. I have never seen C17 post anything that could be classified as "Warmongering." By your name, PSUgrad, I am assuming you attended Penn State? Did any of your English courses ever explain hyperbole?

Semper Fi

He read, he learned, he commented sensibly.
And thank you, much appreciated.

such an intelligent and strong wife :)

lesterblog.blogspot.com

you have something of a reverse harem here at RS.

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies
-- Frank J

What is the female equivalent of a pimp?



Fighting for conservatism one day at a time.

Ya'll better be careful. I just might get an ego or something and then you'll really be in trouble. ;>)

While “getting the heck outta dodge until there are no more bad guys” isn’t a realistic option, why would one assume that remaining there will eventually make these guys lay down their arms and become good guys? Why would anyone believe that in two, five, twenty five, or one hundred years, we’ll there’ll be security there where we can simply maintain bases without conflict? Historically, we’ve defeated or negotiated a cease fire with an enemy. That’s not the case in Iraq.

Also, we’ve seen and heard now McCain can walk down their streets in comfort and at ease. That wasn’t the case. Nor is it the case that someday they will somehow come to our way of thinking.

While “getting the heck outta dodge until there are no more bad guys” isn’t a realistic option, why would one assume that remaining there will eventually make these guys lay down their arms and become good guys? Why would anyone believe that in two, five, twenty five, or one hundred years, we’ll there’ll be security there where we can simply maintain bases without conflict? Historically, we’ve defeated or negotiated a cease fire with an enemy. That’s not the case in Iraq.

Also, we’ve seen and heard now McCain can walk down their streets in comfort and at ease. That wasn’t the case. Nor is it the case that someday they will somehow come to our way of thinking.

Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus

I'm not sure that that's in the Army Field Manual but regardless, I hope you and I never engage in war. I suppose this is a war of interpretations.

Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service