Thursday, December 21, 2006

Why the Democrats are walking into a trap.


Ooooooh, I don't like the look of this. Down south, more and more Dems are coming out strongly opposed to this whole new "Iraq surge" idea, but what they don't seem to understand is how this might come back to bite them in the ass in a big way.

Let's first establish a given: Iraq is fucked. Irreparably. At this point, there's nothing that suggests it can be "fixed" in any meaningful way, and therein lies the trap.

If the Bush administration promotes the "final surge" idea, and the Dems stop it from happening, then after Iraq implodes, the Repubs can come back and say, "Hey, we were almost there, we had it in the bag, and those traitorous, obstructionist Democrats cowardly bailed and messed things up."

That's what would happen. Guaranteed. It wouldn't matter if Iraq was going to implode anyway. If the Dems interfere with the process in any way, it will end up being their fault. So what to do?

Simple. The Dems have to take a deep breath and give the Bush administration free rein for the next two years to see this fiasco through to the end. It sounds harsh but, for purely political reasons, the Dems have to protect themselves in every way so that everyone can see it was the GOP who screwed this pooch.

OK, maybe that's a bit extreme. The Dems can certainly start launching subpoenas in every direction, digging into things like fraud, waste, mismanagement and war profiteering with respect to Operation Iraqi Clusterfuck but, when it comes to actual military strategy, the Dems should make it clear that they're going to give Commander Codpiece all the leeway he wants to botch this thing totally.

30,000 more troops to Iraq? Sure, why the hell not? Go wild. Think of it as "tough love," in which the U.S. will finally and truly get to see what happens when you leave imbeciles like this in charge. And just in time for the 2008 elections. How convenient.

Yes, I realize the Dems want to do the right thing. But given that the wingnuts down there play as dirty as possible, the Dems' first priority should be to protect their backs, and the only way to do that is to keep giving George W. Dumbass as much rope as he wants to hang himself thoroughly.

The Dems will just have to hope there's enough of a country left to salvage come 2008.

UPPITY DATE
: While I appreciate my commenters' dissension on this issue, and that it's silly to play political games while people are dying, I'm still firmly convinced that Job One for the Dems is to hang this albatross firmly around George Bush's neck.

Remember, the dust had barely settled from the midterm elections before the GOP bottom-dwellers were crawling out from under their rocks (mixing my metaphors badly) and trying to spread the blame equally.

Whatever happens, the Dems have to make sure that it's Admiral Dumbass McFlightsuit that owns this debacle. And if they can make sure he owns it right up to the 2008 election, so much the better.

BONUS TRACK: And for no good reason whatsoever ...


8 comments:

mk said...

"...the U.S. will finally and truly get to see what happens when you leave imbeciles like this in charge."

That's some serious wishful thinking. You don't think there's been enough evidence already? I honestly wonder what it would take to make that last 30% (or is it 20%?) of W's support to vanish. Nothing so far seems to do the trick.

No matter what would happen, they'd just find a way to spin it so their base is satisfied. We can only hope science will find a cure someday.

Anonymous said...

Respectively, you are wrong about this CC. Democrats (and liberals and the media, etc) are going to be blamed by Republicans regardless of what they do. The Democratic Party needs to stand up to Bush's inane policies and get the US out of Iraq.

Electorally, the vast majority of people who would be receptive to a Republican message that blames Dems for obstructing a "big surge" would be voting republican anyway. At the margin, I strongly believe that more independents would be put off by Dems not stopping this madness than will be swayed by a "Dems are to blame" message.

Ti-Guy said...

I agree with CC. Start first by chipping away at the huge edifice of lies, deceit and criminality that can bring down the lesser Republicans, their lobbyists and their media lackies, who'll then squeal like stuck pigs to incriminate the more powerful ones. There will then come a time when the shakiness of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy looks critical and at that point, go for the gold and bring down the Whitehouse.

Remember...Righties have limited ability to focus. They respond en mass to one big challenge, but they're useless when dealing with complexity. The last thing you should give them is a clear front against which the can unite.

Time is of the essence though. Bush cannot be permitted to leave office without owning the full failure of Iraq.

catnip said...

The other added bonus would be that if McCain runs in '08 he will be held accountable for this surge idea (which will fail) since he's been a driving force in getting more troops into Iraq.

I understand what you're saying, CC, but my bottom line is that this all has to end quickly. Only 28% support Bush's handling of the war now. It can't get much lower than that (but it probably will). The GOP has already lost the political game on this one and I think it's vital that the Dems scream as loudly as they can to oppose this surge. The generals don't want it. Therefore, the Dems can say they supported the military when push comes to shove.

Adam C said...

How do you ask someone to be the last person to die for Bush's mistakes?

Put the brakes on this as soon as possible, and fuck the political games.

Ti-Guy said...

How do you get around the very peculiar force that patriotism has over all Americans, which most Westerners find quite bizarre? So many Americans seem dumb-struck when they're accused of being unpatriotic and fall over themselves proving that they're not. That's the weakness the Republicans have exploited in silencing dissent and they do it because it works. The Repulicans just have to posit that "winning" is patriotic, that the surge will lead to victory and anyone who doesn't get behind that plan is unpatriotic.

This humanitarian crisis has to end as quickly as possible. Barring the intervention of the international community or some unforeseen cataclysm, I really doubt it will, though.

The Jurist said...

CC: The problem is that if the Dems show any meaningful support for anything Bush does, then they'll be met with cries that they share responsibility - and frankly there's a case to be made that they'll be equally complicit for at least two years worth of carnage if they vote for whatever Bush asks for.

And it's not as if it'll likely affect the result, as Bushco would probably ignore any unfavourable vote anyway based on his mysterious "inherent" powers. Better to let the Republicans be the only ones on record supporting the misadventures, and actually be able to use that against them in '08.

that same ol texan again said...

you should stop writing about US topics. most folks opposed to the Iraq invasion were so because there was no nation building plan. (invasion for profit althoug attractive to some was opposed by those pesky liberals)

Although really obvious now that they were correct, that does not mean we take all our marbles and go home. Now we go and clean up after the dufus and try to do what should have been done four years ago. We have no other ethical choice in the matter.