Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

    I would like to say I don't believe it... but I predicted it so I have to believe it. I knew before the election last year that when the Democrats were dragging Bush over the coals about Iraq saying he didn't send enough troops in to do the job right... remember that? I KNEW that if he ever decided to send more people in then the Democrats would oppose it.

    Now, that hypocritical windbag Dick Durbin has just said we must pull the troops out so the Iraqi people can learn to take care of themselves! UNBELIEVABLE! They have an excuse for everything. If you don't send enough troops in they say you didn't do what it took to get the job done right. Then if you decide - thanks to their complaints - to send more troops in then suddenly they change their whole reasoning and say "oh, well if we send more troops in the Iraqis will never learn to take care of themselves." Well Which One Is it!? You'd think they'd be saying "Bush has finally listened to us and is doing what we've been saying needed to be done for years."

    Seriously you guys... please think about it. Before the elections all the Democrats could say was that Bush was an idiot because he didn't listen to his own generals on the ground who were begging for more troops. They even found retired generals willing to go to the media and say this. But now that Bush says "okay, let's send in more troops" and the Democrats say NO WAY!

    Can any of you see the hypocrisy of the Democrats on this issue? Can any of you see that they simply take whatever side is the opposite of Bush's??? Don't you see the only thing they believe in is opposing Bush? It's so obvious after Durbin's speech tonight.

    All of you who wanted more honesty in government, I sure hope this will rile you up as much as it has me.

  • #2
    Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

    I don't suppose you happen to have any references or direct quotes to support your accusations?

    CD
    Need computer assistance?
    See my Classified/Computer maintenance listing or send me a private message.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

      Of course I do CD, just like you and everyone else. In fact, most of us can do it from memory! It was just a few months ago. Don't you remember?

      I don't suppose you have any references or direct quotes to support your rebuttal of my statements of fact, do you?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

        I actually don't recall the democrats asking for more troops before the election. In fact, i think most of them stood ground that they wanted troops phased out of there to eventually find an end to this meaningless war.

        I am also curious who you are refering to (other than Lieberman).

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

          You guys are either being dishonest or you have terrible memories.

          You don't remember all the talk from the left and from the Dems that Bush has screwed up the war by not listening to his generals and sending in enough troops!? If you're that forgetful then maybe you should get more informed before posting. Because you don't look too bright when you show a complete lack of knowledge about something that was all around you just a few months ago.

          Just to give you a reminder here are some quotes from NY Times articles and editorials from BEFORE last November's election.

          I remember reading these and knowing that if the Dems took over Congress the first thing they'd do is go against everything they had campaigned on and threaten to cut off funds for Iraq. And sure enough before the election they kept complaining that Bush didn't send enough troops and now after the election all they can do is threaten to get them all out. So how was it "not enough troops" then, but it's way more than enough now??? Please you guys get real and demand some intellectual honesty and consistency from your side! They can't just continue to flip flop on the issues of the day whenever it suits them.

          NY Times Editorial, August 16th, 2006 - Thomas Friedman
          I just have one question for Mr. Cheney: If we're in such a titanic struggle with radical Islam, and if getting Iraq right is at the center of that struggle, why did you ''tough guys'' fight the Iraq war with the Rumsfeld Doctrine -- just enough troops to lose -- and not the Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force to create the necessary foundation of any democracy-building project, which is security?
          http://select.nytimes.com/search/res...A10894DE404482

          John Edwards in debate with Dick Cheney - 2004
          We need a fresh start. We need a president who will speed up the training of the Iraqis, get more staff in for doing that.
          http://select.nytimes.com/search/res...A90994DC404482

          From Maureen Dowd, November 30th, 2005
          It always goes this way with the cut-and-run crowd. First they start nitpicking the war, complaining about little things like the lack of armor for the troops. Then they complain that there aren't enough troops.
          http://select.nytimes.com/search/res...A80994DD404482

          NY Times October 24th, 2006
          There have never been enough troops, the result of Mr. Rumsfeld's negligent decision to use Iraq as a proving ground for his pet military theories, rather than listen to his generals.
          http://select.nytimes.com/search/res...A90994DE404482

          NY Times October 9th, 2006
          According to the right, things didn't go wrong because the invasion was a mistake, or because Donald Rumsfeld didn't send enough troops. Or because the occupation was riddled with cronyism and corruption...
          http://select.nytimes.com/search/res...A90994DE404482

          P.S. I would like an apology from both of you for suggesting Dems and Libs never complained that we didn't use enough troops. And you have to admit you didn't know what you were talking about, did you?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

            Except for all John Edwards, none of those quotes seem to be from politicians, they're from writers. Are writers part of Congress now?

            Edwards seems to be advocating what GW is doing....apparently over 2 years later.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

              Originally posted by LongTime Resident View Post
              Edwards seems to be advocating what GW is doing....apparently over 2 years later.
              EXACTLY MY POINT LTR! Edwards "seems to be advocating" exactly what GW is doing now. Only problem is - that now that GW is doing what Edwards wanted all along, guess what? Edwards no longer wants it! He is now advocating the opposite. He's now advocating pulling all the troops out. You prove my point exactly. Could it be any more clear that whatever Democrats support is ALWAYS that which Bush opposes? And whatever they oppose is always that which Bush supports?

              These guys have no beliefs about what should be done in Iraq, they only use Iraq as a way to attack Bush. They are driven by an insane hatred of Bush. A hatred that they put far above their love of country. If Bush doesn't send more troops, they complain that he hasn't sent enough troops. Then when Bush gives into their demands and agrees to send more troops - then suddenly in the twinkling of an eye - they ALL turn in lock-step and demand that he send no more troops and in fact that he should bring the ones who are there - home.

              So you must see my point by now unless you're so totally partisan that you absolutely refuse to ever admit that Democrats are capable of any political slimery! The disgrace is that never before has a political party in complete lock-step, so consistently used a war to do political harm to the president. It's a disgrace and it's a shame to the Democratic party.

              Anyway, LTR are you sure you want to sit here and tell us all that you don't believe any Democratic politicians said Bush didn't send enough troops? CD are you still demanding that I provide PROOF? LeeLee, you still want to claim that no Democrats slammed Bush for not sending enough troops? Do you guys really want to make yourselves look that uninformed by asking me to provide proof?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

                I am actually pretty confident that I am not the one making myself look stupid here.

                Yes, I am going to stand by my claims that during election time (as your first post implied) democrats did not support sending more troops. I also would have to agree with LTR, other than an Edwards quote from 2004 your quotes come from writers not policy makers. Regardless, at some point during the war there have been some democrats that supported sending more troops (well before nov. 06), however, at this point in time, when we are now four years into it with still no end in sight, most democrats have joined efforts to phase out troops. While you may see this as hypocrisy, it can also be seen as reflective of changes in the war and failure to create a functioning Iraqi government. (I'd also like to mention there are MANY republicans congressmen who have recently changed their stance as well, would you consider them hypocrites?)

                We can post back and forth and back a forth about the past differences of democrats and republicans, however, strongly siding with one or the other would get us no where. Effective policies are not cut and dry or black and white, as media would like them to be for entertainment and ratings. Instead, if you would like to discuss how to efficiently approach the war I would continue to post. However, the very title of this thread (democratic hypocrisy) implies an unwillingness to look beyond blame and one-sided opinions. So, if someone else would like to partake in this debate go ahead...i'm through.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

                  LeeLee, first of all I said in my original post that "the Democrats were dragging Bush over the coals about Iraq saying he didn't send enough troops in to do the job right... remember that?"

                  Then all you guys, led by CD, jumped on me and demanded proof. I agree with you that a conversation on what should be done in Iraq could be productive. Maybe you could start a new blog on that subject. I'd be happy to participate.

                  But my topic here was the intellectual inconsistency of the Democrats in first claiming not enough troops were sent, and then the minute Bush decides to send more, suddenly they say we must bring them all home.

                  I think a conversation about the hypocrisy of all political parties is warranted and it's good and constructive for citizens to discuss such matters. I would like you guys to see that the leadership on your side has been very hypocritical on this issue. And I'm certainly willing to discuss whether my side has been as well. And if it can be shown that they have - I certainly have no problem admitting to it. That's my problem here though. You guys seem to refuse to admit to any wrong doing by Democrats even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

                    Originally posted by LeeLee View Post
                    Yes, I am going to stand by my claims that during election time (as your first post implied) democrats did not support sending more troops. I also would have to agree with LTR, other than an Edwards quote from 2004 your quotes come from writers not policy makers.
                    • POLICY MAKER: Hillary Clinton - November 2006: "The mistake that they made is that when they kicked out Saddam, they decided to dismantle the whole authority structure of Iraq. ... We never sent enough troops and didn't have enough troops to control or seal the borders," Clinton said.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...22.html?sub=AR
                    • POLICY MAKER: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid - January 24, 2005: That is why we will also work to increase our military by up to 40,000 by 2007 so that we have enough troops to win the peace in Iraq and fight terrorism around the world, without extending their tours of duty or preventing them from leaving the force when their service is up. http://reid.senate.gov/newsroom/reco...38&&year=2005&
                    • POLICY MAKER: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid - June 27th 2005: The pre-war intelligence failures, the failure to go in with enough troops all have hurt our efforts in Iraq and directly exposed our troops to greater risk. http://reid.senate.gov/newsroom/reco...48&&year=2005&
                    Now, as we all know Ted Kennedy and others are calling for bringing ALL the troops home. So much for "not enough". Now it's "too many". You really have to wonder what changed so substantially on the ground in Iraq between now and September for Teddy Boy. Conicidentally one thing that changed was Bush, who now says he wants to send more troops. Funny isn't it, only when Bush decided to send more troops - that's when all these Democrats suddenly realized we already had too many!

                    The Democrats "strategy" is to simply oppose Bush. Whatever Bush does - oppose it. That's what they base their "policy" decisions on. And that's a very dangerous way to form national policy.

                    For those of you who are reading this but don't post any responses yourself, now that I've provided the requested PROOF what do you think their response will be? I'm not sure but I can bet you one thing… it's not going to be to say "Wow, Tarmill was right. Dems DID complain that Bush didn't send enough troops! Therefore a valid point has been made that the Dems are not being intellectually consistent."

                    CD demanded that I provide PROOF that Dems had said these things… subtly suggesting that what I was saying wasn't true. Then when I provided proof LTR said it was insufficient because I quoted only one politician. It's nothing more than a debating diversionary tactic. To demand "PROOF" is simply to waste time and divert the debate.

                    I'm just wondering now that I've provided the demanded proof, what will your response be? Maybe you'll make up some more criteria that I should meet. Maybe you'll claim that I haven't quoted from enough politicians from the upper mid-western farm states or that I've only quoted prominent Democrats and maybe you'll suggest they aren't representative of all democrats. Then you could ask me to prove what run-of-the-mill elected democrats agree with these leading Democrats. Then when I do that maybe you'll say "but they aren't representative of Democratic voters" and you'll ask me to go get some quotes from democratic voters.

                    When I do that you'll say I didn't get quotes from enough of them to form a representative sample. Then when I get enough quotes to form a representative sample, you'll say that no sample can truly and accurately represent the views of ALL Democrats and then you'll demand that I get a quote from every single living Democrat - to which you'll finally complain I didn't get quotes from dead ones who were alive and voted last November!

                    So you see how ridiculous all this is? Obviously you want to avoid this topic. And obviously I have provided more than enough proof to substantiate my point. And obviously the only thing left for you to do is to draw attention away from the topic at hand and somehow divert it onto something else. Can't wait to see what you come up with next!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

                      I'm just wondering now that I've provided the demanded proof, what will your response be? Maybe you'll make up some more criteria that I should meet. Maybe you'll claim that I haven't quoted from enough politicians from the upper mid-western farm states or that I've only quoted prominent Democrats and maybe you'll suggest they aren't representative of all democrats. Then you could ask me to prove what run-of-the-mill elected democrats agree with these leading Democrats. Then when I do that maybe you'll say "but they aren't representative of Democratic voters" and you'll ask me to go get some quotes from democratic voters.

                      When I do that you'll say I didn't get quotes from enough of them to form a representative sample. Then when I get enough quotes to form a representative sample, you'll say that no sample can truly and accurately represent the views of ALL Democrats and then you'll demand that I get a quote from every single living Democrat - to which you'll finally complain I didn't get quotes from dead ones who were alive and voted last November!

                      So you see how ridiculous all this is?
                      Yes.

                      And thanks for another good laugh.

                      I think LeeLee said it well....

                      However, the very title of this thread (democratic hypocrisy) implies an unwillingness to look beyond blame and one-sided opinions.
                      Many Republicans now, as well as Democrats, are against sending in more troops at this late stage of the war. They are ready to start pulling out troops. They have changed their position based on the results of the past 3 years in Iraq. So, in your world, that would make them ALL hypocrits.

                      I'm curious Tar, did you come to think in "black and white" all on your own or is that how your parents taught you to think?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

                        Great Post LTR! You've made intelligent and persuasive arguments against all of my points. Congratulations! I know you must be very proud!

                        Oh and by the way, YES, I think some of the Republicans who are now changing their minds on this issue could be called hypocrits. It goes both ways you know.

                        The point here though is the Democrats didn't begin to change their position until Bush changed his. Bush changed his to be in line with the Democratic position. But the minute he changed to agree with them - they changed so they could continue to disagree with him and oppose him. They clearly don't care what their position is as long as it's the opposite of his. And that's the real hypocrisy.

                        And by the way LTR, you said this:

                        Originally posted by LongTime Resident View Post
                        Except for all John Edwards, none of those quotes seem to be from politicians, they're from writers. Are writers part of Congress now?
                        So I provided plenty of quotes from POLITICIANS and then all you can do is ignore that and say thanks for the good laugh? I'd think an honest response would be "OK Tar, I see that you're right and many Democratic politicians did complain that we didn't send enough troops. Thanks for pointing that out because before you provided these direct quotes I was under the mis-guided impression that only writers had suggested such a thing. I had totally forgotten that so many leaders of my own party had complained about sending too few troops."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

                          I don't think it takes a genius or even a lawyer to figure out we should have had a LOT more troops in there from the beginning. The first clue was right after we got there and the looting started. (And thanks to the indifference of whoever...the troops, the commanders, I don't know who but I do know nobody stopped it.)

                          We also went into a 21st Century war with a WW2 war plan. And no exit strategy. I could go on and on but it doesn't address the question. Regardless of what should have been done 4 years ago, it is NOW. And NOW is not the same as 4 years ago. We are not finding WMD's. Saddam was caught and hanged. They had a democratic (?) election.

                          Some would say now, that doing what seems to be the better option for the country, is not having our youngster die in an Iraqui civil war between tribes that has been going on for over a millenium. Maybe those troops could be re-deployed here in the states to protect our borders, airplanes, ports, nuclear plants, etc. You may call that hypocrisy. I think you have to be flexible and make decisions based on reality and situations change.

                          I'm not in a courtroom and I'm not here to refute everything you bring up. Do you think every democrat in the country or in Congress got together and decided to disagree with GW just for the hell of it? Do you REALLY think that?
                          (Guess Lieberman missed that party)

                          And I've said this to you before....I think both Dems and Reps are all full of BS or hypocrisy as you might say. I don't judge people by their party affiliation. I consider them as individuals. I know that's a concept you don't "get". Sorry, but that's your problem, not mine.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

                            Since I'm already considered a democrat here, and therefore a hypocrit, I guess i'll go ahead and post on this thread even though i said i was through with it.

                            I just want to ask, regardless of party affiliation, how one could support sending in more troops to prolong a war after 1) over four years we have lost support from almost every single country, alienating ourselves, 2) the purpose of going to war (WMD) was proven nonexistent, 3) over 3,000 american soldiers have been killed, 4) over 36,000 civilians have been killed (!), 5) over $1.2 TRILLION has been spent (on this point I encourage you to read today's NYT article about how that money COULD have been spent: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/bu...29&ei=5087%0A). I'm sure the list can continue...and feel free to add on if you like.

                            I'm not trying to argue here, I just want a clear opposing arguement that would help me understand why anyone would support the new plan while considering the facts stated above.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Democratic Hypocrisy - I KNEW this would happen

                              "For those of you who are reading this but don't post any responses yourself, now that I've provided the requested PROOF what do you think their response will be? I'm not sure but I can bet you one thing? it's not going to be to say "Wow, Tarmill was right. Dems DID complain that Bush didn't send enough troops! Therefore a valid point has been made that the Dems are not being intellectually consistent."

                              Tarmill:

                              I'm one of "those who are reading this but don't post any...." as you put it. I don't profess to be politically adept or even politically motivated in any way, shape or form. I refuse to live MY life that way. Additionally, that would be an inaccurate description of who I am! However, I do have to say one thing and that is, that just because you have provided "proof" a very powerful word in all aspects of life, that doesn't make you superior to everyone else who disagrees with you on the "issues" discussed here. I am grateful to you for posting what you've posted. But, that said, even though I don't and won't take a side (politically) that is, I will say that when Bush went in to Iraq, I was under the impression that, his motives and actions were based on preventing another 9/11 type of scenario. Keeping the U.S. from being invaded and protected from the extremist regime so prevalent in the Mid-East today. Maybe my impressions were wrong, but since our troops landed there to "keep the peace" if you will allow, I (personally know of 2 friends with family over there. Very scary for them), have noticed how much more violence, bombings and ill-conceived stratagies have done nothing more than make a volatile situation much worse. I listened to Bush's speech the other evening and he almost apologized for being wrong. But, he also stated that he believes that sending more troops over would improve this horror. When will we as Americans benefit from having our young men and women slaughtered by war and when as a nation, will WE feel more secure for all of these "efforts?"

                              I'm asking this as a "regular" person. Not as a politically adept or politically knowlegable intellect.

                              "CC"

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X