GOP Defections
crossposted at:
Conservative Thoughts
.
If a politician has been in office for a long time and over recent history has been rather quiet, choosing to make public statements on hot button issues tends to look political rather than sincere.
`I have carefully studied the Iraq situation and believe we cannot continue asking our troops to sacrifice indefinitely while the Iraqi government is not making measurable progress to move its country forward,’ Domenici told reporters from New Mexico this week. Instead, Domenici embraced a bipartisan bill by Colorado Democrat Ken Salazar that would put U.S. troops on track to leave by the end of March 2008.
What Domenici failed to add to those remarks was the careful study is more a matter of a re-election strategy. Based on his votes for amnesty and recent comments on the war in Iraq it is clear re-election is his primary concern. Of the GOP Senators voicing opposition to victory in Iraq, Senator Lugar’s recent comments on the topic certainly don’t indicate a concern about re-election since he was re-elected in 2006 and it not up until 2012. He can be fairly confident these issues will be only memories then. But Lugar will be 75 in 2012 and may prefer retirement. His opposition to the war in Iraq may serve other purposes in his last years in office. It certainly does not serve the troops. It is surprising the article referenced above did not mention Senator Chuck Hagel. Also up for re-election and on the wrong side of issues on Iraq and amnesty.
The real question for the Senators opposing victory in Iraq is why they have less patience and a sense of fair play than their counterparts in the general public who oppose victory in Iraq. They should at least have the courage to honor the recent funding appropriations for the troops in Iraq by allowing what is commonly called the ’surge’ to reach Congress’ self-imposed timeline before abandoning support. It is as if the instant society has lost the ability to emulate the greatest generation’s discipline and commitment to country. A philosophy not lost on the troops. Their continued dedication, commitment, sacrifice and love of country is without compromise. Why politicians who are safe in Washington cannot support their efforts unanimously is troubling at best and shameful at worst.
You may have noticed a recurring phrase, ‘opposition to victory in Iraq’. That is what lack of support for the troops really is. It is not an opposition to war. The antiwar peaceniks would like you to believe that. It makes it easier for them to accept defeat. Because no sane human being wants war. But humankind has not learned how to live without it. And when it occurs and one’s country is involved, you are either for victory or defeat. There is no middle ground. Opposing the war in Iraq is opposing victory in Iraq. The quickest, most efficient and sensible method for ending a war is victory. To borrow phrases on the topic, we win, they lose and there is no substitute for victory.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson’s Website, DeMediacratic Nation, 123beta, Big Dog’s Weblog, Right Truth, Adam’s Blog, On the Horizon, Stuck On Stupid, Webloggin, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, The Amboy Times, , Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Faultline USA, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein… has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.