Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About Chris Cillizza  |  On Twitter: The Fix and The Hyper Fix  |  On Facebook  |  On YouTube  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed

RNC Ad Sparks Controversy

An Internet ad released by the Republican National Committee late last week that paints Democrats as favoring retreat in Iraq is causing considerable controversy both within the GOP ranks and (no surprise) among Democrats.

The ad, which is promoted prominently on the RNC Web site, flashes replays quotes on the Iraq war from Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.); photos of the Democrats are shown along with a waving white flag. An on-screen billboard, which, as the camera pans back, is being read by a soldier, scolds: "Our soldiers are watching, and our enemies are too. Message to Democrats . . . retreat and defeat is not an option." (I wrote about this ad in the Post's Sunday politics column.)

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday that the RNC should pull the Internet ad, predicting: "We're going to drive a wedge among ourselves that will make the world less safe, including ourselves." (In case you missed "Meet the Press" yesterday, it's now available via Web cast here.)

Graham's sentiment was echoed (and furthered) by some leading Democrats. Karen Finney, a DNC spokeswoman, said, "If personal attacks helped us fight terrorism, Osama Bin Laden would be dead right now instead of recruiting new terrorists."

RNC communications director Brian Jones said today that his organization has no plans to take down the ad. "The bottom line is a number of high ranking Democrats are advocating a retreat and defeat strategy in Iraq, which sends the wrong message to our troops and our enemies," said Jones. "The Web ad illustrates this through the Democrats' own words."

It's important to remember that Internet ads have little practical effect other than motivating the most ardent party members. Unlike commercials run on television and radio, Web-based spots are limited in scope and influence. However, the resultant hubbub over the GOP ad has given it a national profile. Sound off in the comment section over whether the ad will benefit Republicans or backfire.

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 12, 2005; 11:09 AM ET
Categories:  Democratic Party , Republican Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Weekend Fix
Next: R.I.: Club For Growth Backs Chafee Opponent

Comments

http://www.insurance-top.com/company/ auto site insurance. The autos insurance company, compare car insurance, auto insurance. from website .

Posted by: insurance auto | June 29, 2006 1:53 AM | Report abuse


Beneath every bully exterior beats the heart of a little boy, abusers are still little boys....little boys don't try to be so abusive unless they've been pushed into the pond one too many times....ha ha haaaaaaaaaa


Lit'l meat puppet talking about the French or the Russians or the Americans.....is as simplistic as talking about fords or chevies as being the best car....

Life isn't an either or situation. If the democrats, republicans, french, your president are taking advantage of you....no means no....they should go to jail....you don't need to understand any more than that....just 'cause you're married to them doesn't mean that you shouldn't call the police when they abuse you, grow up....change, admit it, you're an abusive personality....dink.

Posted by: It's always nice to take a warpig | December 14, 2005 7:09 PM | Report abuse

You people really need to get it, if you're not making over 2 million a year, you're interests are not being served.

The Saudii's are buying up America like it's still 1895, and you can get a state for a reasonable price....hey I heard Wyoming is for sale.

Are Americans fat or just hopeless, and addicted to whatever they see on television, they've been trained haven't they, there are very little restrictions regarding lying are there?

Is there any food value in some of the junk food we allow people to sell? Why put a warning on a bleach bottle to not drink it if we allow food to be sold without food value...as in nutritious, made of something digestible. If americans are overweight and gullible, well that's a good market. Sell gullible poor people things that they don't need and you end up paying for their emergency room visits, meeting one of them in a head-on collision without them having insurance, and so on.

It would be a good idea to make the so called marginilized good citizens and alert them to the fact that everything that is addictive may not be good for them.

You want to help people and live in a better country, don't just give them things, don't mislead them and help them to see that they are being led in the wrong direction, actually interrupt the cycle of poverty and children having children by intervening. It really doesn't have to cost any more than it already does to support police, ER, community service, prisons and so forth.....but like the CEO's pillaging General Motors, your leaders say, "Why should I try and do it on my watch?" Because you get done when you start something before "someday."


As they said in Boston Legal last night, "It's that simple."

Didn't we just pass a law holding gun makers not responsible under any circumstances, for deaths by firearms that they sell? Why would any citizen pass such an obviously irresponsible law?

Since most of them only have IQ somewhat near 100, then whose fault is that? The people that are smarter, you and in most cases your leaders, although I would guess that GWBush's academic record musta been greased considering his level of elocution.

We owe it to the stupid people to make sure that someone stands up for them or elsest they may just reelect another rich kid doing what his folks tell him to so he can stay rich.

Posted by: Work is part of being alive..... | December 14, 2005 6:58 PM | Report abuse

As long as our country is in the hands of the Christian Taliban with their fear of homosexuality and rabid anti-abortions attitude it does not matter what rational people believe or do. Point in case this country re-elected George Bush as president even though it was apparent he and his administration were incompetent. This administration demonstrated over and over again that it would always chose big business over the people of this country. All they had to do is say they were against gay marriages and abortions. Well now we are sowing what we reap, unfortunately those of us who voted against Bush are also suffering. When the elections were over my motto was America you deserve what you get.

Posted by: Robert Torres | December 14, 2005 3:34 PM | Report abuse

I agree that there are politicians in DC who are willing to concede defeat to our enemies. But it's not the Democrats; it is President Bush and the soft Republicans in our capitol.

While I disagree with the policies of this administration, I pray everyday that President Bush will beginning showing courage and stop running away from his responsibilities as commander-in-chief. Courage does not mean giving a puff-speech before a pre-screened audience in front of a backdrop with repetitive slogans meant to send subliminal messages to the viewing public. Strength means making the difficult decisions that put America first. Unfortunately, Bush and the Republicans are not willing to do what it necessary to produce a strong America.

Howard Dean was right, and Republicans should admit it. Bush knows that his policy is losing, yet he refuses to change it. Bush does not want to win the war in Iraq; he just wants to keep the status quo until he can hand it off to the next president. Democrats and responsible Republicans want to win this war and bring our troops home with dignity. However you slice it, Bush's conduct is simply cowardly.

Bush thinks that it is important to "stay the course" just to maintain a particular image with the public. Democrats and responsible Republicans think it is important to win the war.

Bush thinks that his polls numbers are more important than the security of this country. Democrats and responsible Republicans believe in a strong military and in respecting our troops.

I pray that President Bush swallows his pride and starts putting our country over his own interests. National Republicans need to join the Democrats and responsible Republicans in putting America first!

Posted by: JR | December 13, 2005 11:40 PM | Report abuse

It's always fun to read the anguished bleatings of the lefties when the conservatives expose their positions for what they are. If you don't want to see an ad with a white flag across the faces of your leaders, don't advocate a surrender. If you think we've lost and the only option is surrender and retreat--just say so--and live with the consequences. After readings these posts, I know OBL is right. America is soft.

Posted by: Warpig | December 13, 2005 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Please ignore any of the crap I just spewed ... There was a jihadist in the room and I didn't want get him upset by posting anything pro-Bush.

Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | December 13, 2005 4:01 PM | Report abuse

The ad will probably not benefit anyone... few people are open to new information. They have already decided which "truth" they will recognize.

I do think it is telling that a string of quotes, even if somewhat out of context, can be combined to form the "attack" ad in debate. If you do not wish to hear yourself saying something in an ad, don't say it to start with.

Posted by: law | December 13, 2005 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Merna, I have to say, you certainly do have a way with words. You are dreadfully ignorant and blatantly wrong in almost every point you make, but you certainly are creative in your writings. I'll give you that.

izmil hit it on the head with the 12:09pm post today. no matter how many times the GOP screams and carries on about "undermining the president," this country was founded on the central principle of the right to dissent, to organize and to voice your opinions. There is nothing more American than marching in protest. And I'd like to see ANY Republican counter that argument. But unfortunately, izmil, your phrasing "We are a United States" is no longer true. We are not United. Maybe we should change the name of our country to the States of America. The good old S. of A..... That is, unless the powerhungry GOP starts to realize that squleching 50% of the country is about as anti-American as it gets. But im not going to hold my breath on it.

The fate of the next decade or more in this country rests on not only Democrats winning election after election, but for Republican Voters to vote for True Republicans and not extremist NeoCons who do NOT care about the electorate, but have a global bent re: domianation of the world by military might (and if you disagree then please explain PNAC).

Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | December 13, 2005 3:14 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans are wrong, wrong, wrong...
They are waging a destrutive war against the rights of all Americans to protest!!!

We are a United States for all citizens not just for the those who agree with their lies...

Posted by: izmil | December 13, 2005 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Because this stuff just isn't new (neither the ad nor the response) it won't have any impact at all except to deepen the whole of disgust with which half the public holds both sides.

The Republican approach works because those that still vote are resigned to what the GOP is offering. The Democrats can't win unless they show a willingness to step out of counterculture box they live in (a willingness they deeply resent having to show because it means recognizing that the public doesn't trust eye to eye with them on this war even if they are exactly right).

Both of these facts, though, reinforce their approaches. The fewer swing voters each side has to worry about the more predictable the outcomes.

Democratic victories will consist of being themselves in the places they dominate, showing religion in the South, and showing independence in the West and Midwest.

The Senate advantage looks better for them in '08 than '06 and if they could just get themselves to nominate a Mark Warner (VA), a John Edwards (NC), or an Evan Bayh (IN) they'll put themselves back on the map. Put a liberal on the second spot, not the first one, then he/she can cultivate a reputation as VP that could allow them to win.

Only problem is the Dems are so all over the map in Congress it's hard to see how a Dem President could lead. It's like herding cats.

Posted by: wethejord | December 13, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Edwardo;ie;DZ ie;pablo ie;fairandbalacned ie;impeachbushnow

What racist? You mean about the puss dripping hags? Hey now
You know good and well that the Koran says nothing about 72 virgins for anyone committing suicide or murder.
You know it's just a ploy used by the Islamo-Fascists to get lonley, miserable people kept like mushrooms, fed-crap and in the dark, by thier totalitarian masters to dupe them into doing what they themselves would never dream of doing.
Man, I'm not knocking Muslims, I'm telling the truth about the fellas that are lying to ya.
Real Muslims don't believe that crap. Real Muslems don't murder innocent people and commit suicide.
It wasn't the Americans that ever colonized your lands, it was the French, and Russians that fought you, and oppressed you.
You would have never beat the Russians without the American war-machine helping you. Yet like the sheep following the judas goat you still run to the French aand Russians.
What do you think they will do if given half a chance?
America helps people. 54% of the entire aid given in the world comes from America. We don't take your lands but we do encourage trade that provides jobs and incomes for developing nations.
We spread freedom,regaurdless of what your masters say, freedom is a good thing.
It's what God intended for us when he gave us free will.
Your masters hide the truth from you, the truth is that God wants each person to resist temptation.
If temptation is removed from you, how do you prove yourself worthy?
A rightious man can live down-town Las-Vegas and not be tempted.
Anyway, they are just men, how are they to know the mind of God?
If a blind man leads a blind man will they not both fall in a hole?
No land belongs to man, all belongs to God. The struggle is not for land, for where-ever your sould dwells is your home.
The struggle is for your soul, a struggle each man and woman must make alone.
All who pledge their souls to a man, will lose their soul.
Do not lie, and do not do what you hate, if you love your soul and he who gave it to you.

Posted by: Merna | December 13, 2005 11:51 AM | Report abuse

I just wanted to express my dissatisfaction with your current ad that I watched on your website. I have been a registered Democrat for only 3 years, and before that, was not involved at all. I grew up in Texas, and I'm familiar with our President, as well as a number of military families, some of whom presently have sons, daughters, and fathers serving in Iraq.
I am tired of this war being such a political issue of division between our parties. I think its foolish that you would respond to heatfelt concern by many Americans, both Republican and Democrat, with an ad that hints at cowardice or a lack of patriotism by our Democratic leadership. I do not blame our President for the war, but I do think it is time for leadership, on both sides of the isle, to bring our troops home. This is not a war on terror, and the sooner this country has an opportunity to pass a referendum on this (2006 is just around the corner) we will see the administration change its tune. If they do not, this will cost all of us a great amount of sorrow and will make life for future generations of Americans a troubled one in the world abroad.
Lets start thinking about real solutions to terrorism, such as fighting it in the RIGHT places. I do not wish any harm on our troops, nor would I question their service, but I will continue to question George W. Bush and his cabinet on their flawed and dangerous agenda.

Scot Rutledge
Las Vegas, NV
This is what I sent the RNC a week ago in reponse to their add:

I vote for candidates from both parties. I know many Republicans that do not want to see our troops in Iraq any longer. Send our Nevadan National Guardsmen home. This is not about retreat, its about getting our men women home safely and letting the Iraqi people solve their own problems. Why not send some RNC people over to Iraq for the holidays? I bet our troops would love your tasteless video.

Posted by: Scot in Las Vegas | December 13, 2005 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Anything that shines a light on the Democrat Party's anti-troop/anti-USA position always results in complaints from the liberal left and their media lapdogs. The current attacks on our President and on our fight against terroism borders on treason.

Posted by: Bill Henries | December 13, 2005 11:48 AM | Report abuse

I want to know what intelligence was available, how reliable was it, who in the Bush adminsistration knew which intellingence was reliable and what was not. I want to know how much influence Cheney had in twising intelligence to suit his desire to oust Saddam. Wasn't Cheney the Defense Secretary during the Gulf War. Did he have an ax to grind? A lot of questions of an inempt administration.

BTW Merna, if the DEMs so ruined this country should we turn it over to Brownie. He's so good at what he did at FEMA, he personally has blood of innocent Katrina victims on his hands just as Bush, Cheney, and Rumfield has in Irag.

Cheney lied about intelligence. Libby lied about his involvement with Valerie Plame, Karl Rove has a history of using whisper campaigns and dirty tricks to personally attack folks like McCain. Bush mislead the American people in going to war in Irag. To Delay violated Texas money-laundering charges, the Supreme court obvious sees something in the Texas redistricting case to consider it as part of its case load. The culture of corruption that permeates the GOP makes me yearn for the good ole days of the past 40 years. In the take off one of Reagans camplaign slogans, " Are we and the world better off today now that we have had 10 years of GOP rule in the House and1 17 of the past 25 years of electing Republican presidents? Me thinks NOT.

Those are the issues of the day, not what happend 40 years ago.

Posted by: ImpeachBushNow | December 13, 2005 2:44 AM | Report abuse

Neglected Reports On Saddam by the Liberal Media:
1. American planes were fired on Every Day While Enforcing The United Nations " No fly zone.
2. Suicide Bombers who attacked Israel had money offered and paid to their surviving family by Saddam.
3. No full coverage of the Mass Graves discovered in the Country.
4. No mention of the New Freedom of The Muslim Women.
5. President Bush never promised up a Rose Garden in regards to "The War On Terror".

Posted by: Don | December 12, 2005 11:44 PM | Report abuse

Merna: "Remember, if a little old lady..."

You're no lady. Not with all the absurd racist crap you've been spouting all day.

Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | December 12, 2005 10:29 PM | Report abuse

The Dem's are ticked because they can't get away from their own comments.

http://crazypolitics.blogspot.com/2005/12/senator-do-your-ears-work.html

Posted by: Crazy Politico | December 12, 2005 9:08 PM | Report abuse

DZ,Pablo,Edwardo

Just think about it. Remember, if a little old lady from podunk like me can find you.....
next time you are without your handler, call any FBI office. They aren't too bright either but they can get you out safe.

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 9:06 PM | Report abuse


RNC ad is proganda to take attention off the fact that of failed Bush policies and the fact they are scared an independant investigation would prove the Bush Administration misled the AMerican public and in the case of Cheney blantantly manufactured the case for war. IF true, and I do believe it is true, then Bush and Cheney should be impeached.

Posted by: ImpeachBushNow | December 12, 2005 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Hey Pablo,

Ya know, we got folks can fix you right up. Bring you in from the cold. Nice place to live, good food, no more running, no more looking over you shoulder wondering how close our guys are.

You could go back to a normal life, be a normal Muslim.

Forget all the hate and killing and raise a family.

Sounds good huh?

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Pablo, baby, Sorry didn't mean to hurt your little feelings.

What was a racial slur?

I'm just worried about you, that's all. Just wanna make sure you are ok.
I know how all the propaganda stuff you have to work with can play with your mind.

At one point you even sounded like you might stop all this and go straight.
What happened? Get scared of the death penalty for jumping ship on old binny boy?

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Gee, I thought you were partial to mac's, you like all that voice control stuff.
Guess they've got those old apples running pretty fast these days.
Nice worm program ya got rollin' ya really should'nt hide so many of your personal files in it though.
Gotta say ya know your way around the paint program though.

Tell me buddy, how ya doing? got a warm place to stay?
Little cold hummas in the morning?

Is it like shift work for you guys?

Come on baby, don't clam up on me now.
We can have a good old chat.

I got a great recipe for Honey cakes, want it?

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Owwwwwwwwww that must have hurt. That the best you got? Name calling and racail slurs? Thanks for showwing your true colors.

Posted by: pablo | December 12, 2005 8:22 PM | Report abuse

Hey DZ, Pablo, edwardo old buddy,

Tell me he didn't make you pay for your own puter to do his bidding?
Ya didn't di ya? yeaaaah I just bet you did.
Say, do you get the 72 puss dripping hags for haacking?
Just wondering if you only get like 2 or 3 since you don't, ya know, like do anything serious for your master.

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 8:12 PM | Report abuse

Wow, pablo, you used my nick just like over in the CMA board, how clever.
Gotta give you this you can sure change your nick and post like lightning.
Old bin-laden come up offa dime and get you a pentium did he?
Serioussly sugar, where'd you train? Can't-ta-nadia? America? surely none of your mud huts teach hacking along with flea scratching do they?

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 7:49 PM | Report abuse

There ya go pablo, not edwardo any more?
Thought we covered gutless when we discussed your box-cutter buddies killing helples, innocent women and children.

Big brave fella's, hide in the shadows, and like roaches scatter when someone turns on the light.

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 7:41 PM | Report abuse

I think we should cut and run and surrender to the terrorists.

29 Republicans named Billy Joe just shat themselves with joy. Just kidding buck-o. Go buy yourself a new Walmart gun rack and beat your wife with it. C'mon, FEEL THE RAGE. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Hahaha. The GOP. So funny. "Strong leader syndrome" = Testosterone politicized.

Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | December 12, 2005 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Hey DZ,

I got bad breath? Too much garlic? I knew vampires didn't care for garlic, but I didn't know it affected you guys.

Hey are you the one calling himself Koppel in those every-other Friday 11 O'Clock phone conferances?

How was the Ottawa meeting? Pick up any post-cards?

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 7:34 PM | Report abuse

just spent some time reading the postings of too gutless to wright it's name and Merna. I could almost take them seriously, then I remember that these are the same people that believe the Flintstones was a reality show and Fred and Dino realy did live together

Posted by: pablo | December 12, 2005 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Hey DZ,

Maybe I should change my nick to Kilroy?

You guys change your nicks every five minutes, but your style gives you away.
Gonna kill another puter for me? I'll just get another and find another way to fight you.

If you manage to shut me down, there are a million waiting in line to take my place.

You guys can learn, you just don't learn real fast.
You still hiding up in can't-ta-nadia? or did you join your buddies in Atlanta?

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 6:41 PM | Report abuse

It's sad. As someone who witnessed the destruction of the World Trade Center it is a disgrace that the President and his party continue to peddle their lies about Iraq. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and still doesn't.

Americans will continue to die as long as Bush and co are in power. This country should be focusing on islamic extremism. But the Iraq war has twisted our foreign policy. Hopefully we will not pay for this policy with another terrorist attack.

Posted by: FEDUP | December 12, 2005 6:18 PM | Report abuse

History may find itself to be historical.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 5:42 PM | Report abuse

I think it is only 70 houris, but we could offer them 72.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Left Angle,

Every dead terrorist over there is one that won't be over here.
It also serves to put them on notice that we won't be like the Democrats and stand idly by while they plot and murder us.
It tells them and those that support them that there is now a very heavy price to pay for attacking Aamericans.
It also tells them that if they insist on being cannon fodder for for their Islamo-Fascist leaders, who run and hide, prefering to send their ignorant menions in their stead, we will send them happily on their way to their 72 puss dripping hags in hell. ; )

DZ
Well hey there old buddy, like my comment about the Islamo-Fascists that come to boards like this and play-along with the bug-out brigade?
Figured it might smoke one of you out, although it usually takes wacking you on your little pointed head with a shoe. You guys are so predictable. ; )
You know you are losing, we won't let the few loud lefties and the cowardly Dem's cause us to run like you'd like us to.
Sorry Charlie, not this time.

On the Timothy McVeigh deal, did you miss the recently de-classified FBI documents that showed the Oklahoma City bombers made more than 20 phone calls to the first World Trade center bomber Ramsy Yousef?
That these documents showed that McVeigh and his co-horts had bomb training from Yousef and al-Queda.
Wonder why the main-stream-media wasn't interested in reporting this?
Wonder why the Clinton Administration chose to cover up the involvment of foreign agents in the Oklahoma City Bombing?
Where oh where are the Bob Woodwards when a Democrat hides stuff rom the American public?

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Hey 90210 drop the drama. Moral bankrupcy? Is it moral to behead someone? Or to gas your own people? Or to kill protestors over taking their land. You better call your doc and get on that happy pill. You are caught-up in the emotional attachment of the Dems. Step back from the ledge. America's poor have healthcare. They walk into the county emergency room and wait in line to get served for free. What a travesty...The Dems have waged this war on the poor, the middle class, the economy and the environment for decades. They have yet to solve anything. We could have given the poor the money we have spent on poverty in this country and they would all be wealthier than myself. If you have not learned, in this country you have to earn it.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 5:31 PM | Report abuse

I agree there is trouble with our border and in our land. Islamo-facists are here...You agree. If SH was not so imminent why did JK say he was, or why did BC lob a few missiles to blow up an asprin factory? Or why did BC sign a bill to exert regime change in Iraq? Iraq is one such theater, Afganistan was another. The US is safer. When Islamic countries have self-determination, their hatred will wain. This is not brainwashing or propaganda this is common sense. Defense wins championships, but a good offense can be a good defense. If you would rather sit back and let the storm brew, you are crazy. We have so many freedoms, we could not possibly defend ourselves completly on our turf. We would not stand for those freedoms to be taken.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 5:19 PM | Report abuse

How can Americans continue to allow this corrupt administration to lead us in a downward spiral of moral bankrupcy ("torture is ok but we don't do it") neglecting our home problems, creating larger numbers of American poor without healthcare,declaring war on the middle class, and speed driving the planet's atmosphere (global warming) toward the point of no return?

When I think of the greed and lunacy of this administration and its legacy, I know that, if we have the planet long enough to write (objective) history books, Bush will be known as the modern-day Nero. All he needs is the fiddle.

Posted by: Sharon in the real OC | December 12, 2005 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Greg Palkot of Fox News just did a special "Winning Iraq the Untold Story."
Greg was out amoungst the Iraqi people getting the real story, he wasn't hiding in a Hotel room like CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC etc. reading a script and showing footage handed him by someone from Al-Jazera.
This showed the progress our guys were making, the progresss the Iraqi people were making. It showed millions of smiling Iraqi and told their stories.
These Iraqi's spoke in their own words, most spoke in english and were very happy we had come to save them.
More school, more teachers, more hospitals and doctors and nurses than ever before in Iraq. More water and power than ever before in Iraq.
Under Saddam the people were doled out electricty by the hour, depending on how pleased Saddam was with the loyalty of their neighborhood.
Now neighborhoods that never had water, electricity and sewer systems, have them and they have it 24-7, not just at Saaddams pleasure.

Today during the Presidents speech today, a reporter asked how many Iraqi had died in this war, the President answered about 30,000.
What the President did not say and should have, was that the families of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi murdered by Saddam, and the hundreds and thousands of those Iraqi tortured, maimed, and raped by Saddam, do not regret the price of their freedom.

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 5:10 PM | Report abuse

We are all mere pawns of the Republicans. I'm melting, I'm melting...Libs do believe that government is smarter than the masses. Since all administrations have failed. Mike, tell us o'great Oracle, what was BC's failing?

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous:

The CIA & FBI testified before Congress last year that "terrorist cells" are encounsed within the domestic U.S. as we speak.

With pourous U.S. open borders, illegal aliens are pouring into the this country and there is no way to know exactly what there motivess for being here are.

You seem to believe that all of the insurgency recruits are in Iraq. You beleive that spreading democracy in the middle east will stop terrorist attacks
against the U.S. You believe that Sadaam
Hussien was a "imminent threat to the U.S.
You believe the u.s. is "safer' because of the removal of hussien.

If you beleive all of this as i have been reading your post, then IMHO you are a victim of propaganda implementation and brainwashing by the Bush/Rove Axis.

you need to sit down and exam exactly what they are saying..the transparency and delusional nonreality of their Iraq policy
has become apparent to a majority of the
U.S.citicizens who are calling for a rightful redeploynent of our forces.

wake up before its to late.

Posted by: Left Angle | December 12, 2005 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Robert spews more elitest dogma...blah, blah, blah. Even BC could not wreck this nation. Face it, you are losing. The Neo-con is coined by pot-headed libs who can't see themselves as the problem and out of the mainstream. I laugh at you spongebob...you don't know how America really lives. Just keep living in your ivory tower as an Oxford Don and sureal picture of the world. Every thing will be alright in the world if it wasn't for those darn Rebublicans. Come down and pull a shift or two in a manufacturing facility or push orders at the drive-through until midnight. While everyone else in America spends their hard earned money at Walmart you can drink your machine ground French roast and state that you care about the little working man...I fart in your generl direction.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 5:05 PM | Report abuse

History I think will find the Bush Administration's greatest failing to be incompetence. Dogma aside (as if it could ever be) these people cannot operate large institutions. They are abysmal managers.

Posted by: Mike | December 12, 2005 5:04 PM | Report abuse

I should have directed my last post towards the nameless Republican shill who is posting responses on this discussion board. Please accept my apologies for the lack of clarity regarding for whom my post was intended.

Posted by: Robert In West Hollywood | December 12, 2005 5:00 PM | Report abuse

The war in Iraq will not stop a Timothy McVeigh or other domestic terroists. The war did place the conflict out of America, where it belongs. It did result in regime change as made a policy of the US during the Clinton Administration. It did result in free elections in Iraq. The trial of SH. It has broken the resistence of the middle-east against the free-world and will continue to stabilize the world. Even if there is conflict in France. The war has been sucessful, Dems just can't see it from their biased perspective. Be intellectualy honest here and state that one less dictator is good and that democracy in the middle-east is good.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Merna, you're everywhere, but, unfortunately, no more rational here than anywhere else.

Posted by: DZ | December 12, 2005 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous:

So what youre saying is that if the critics of Bush's Iraq War would shut up,
the "enemy" would stop attacking?

Posted by: Left Angle | December 12, 2005 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Don't gloat, you clearly did not READ my post. I wasn't praising Republicans. As to all the Democratic "negativity," that claim is also a tool of Conservative misdirection. Your transparent attempts at Orwellian re-definition of the meaning and intent of the English language do not lend your argument any substantive value. The inconceivable mélange of conflicting philosophical ideologies making up the core belief system at the heart of the Neo-Conservative moment are utterly irreconcilable and doomed to self-destruction. Unfortunately, the actions this Republican President and Congress are taking based upon this "value set" will inevitably end in disaster for this Country. There will NEVER be anything positive that anyone will EVER be able attribute as the result of actions taken by this administration. The gross destruction to the standing of our Nation within the global community, our national political framework and our governmental bureaucratic institutions resulting from Republican irresponsibility and contempt for rational, pragmatic governance will take decades, if not half a century to clean up. The hangover from this period of American history will be ugly and unpleasant to the point were we may very well never fully recover from the experience.

Posted by: Robert In West Hollywood | December 12, 2005 4:51 PM | Report abuse

I understand that Kerry's statement was meant to question the adminstration's direction. But if do not understand the power that his comments have to the enemy of the free world, you need to wake up. These people do not have access to the truth. They will use anything against us. They have two angels on their shoulders. One to record what they have done good one to record what they have done bad. The only assurance they have of reaching heaven is by becoming a martyr.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 4:48 PM | Report abuse

A question for Merna:

How is anything going on in the Bush's Iraq War going to stop a domestic terrorist attack in the U.S. in the future?

Posted by: Left Angle | December 12, 2005 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Hey Rigo,

Don't listen to the brain-dead bug-out brigade. Millions of us here at home are so proud of you and yours!
You are the best of us, and we fight on the web everyday to get the truth to Americans deprived of that truth by power greedy bug-out Dems, their selectively-editing Main-stream-media, and the Islamo-Fascistss that come into boards like this pretending to be liberals crying along with the bug-out brigade.

You know we love you son, we will counter these wack-jobs here, you just do what you gotta do and know it's the right thing and that real Americans are with you 190%

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Robert in West Hollywood: Well said.

Posted by: Mike 234 | December 12, 2005 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Nameless poster says: "Mike 234, you don't see that these comments by Dems is fodder for terroists."

Disagreement with your right wing dogma is "fodder for terrorists?" No doubt you truly believe that. Which is sad. Very sad.

Posted by: Mike 234 | December 12, 2005 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Today Murtha was on tv trying to whine about how we need to bring back the draft, I say trying as the poor old fella kept forgetting what he was supposed to say, lots of blank stares in his disjointed rhetoric .
The Democrats keep wanting to bring back the Draft as they know that would help them in their bug-out strategy.
In Tommy Franks book "American Soldier" he explained how the draft really hurt us in Vietnam. Many who did not want to be there refused to train and were the cause of not only their own deaths but the deaths of others who were forced to depend on them.
The all volunteer military is better as the people want to be there, the train, they learn, they defend each others backs.
Democrats would love to bring the dope taking, fragging, misfits back into the Military in order to weaken our Military.
The Democrats want lots of liberal cannon fodder on the front so they can point to the body bags as proof we are wrong and so that their little cry-baby liberal menions will scream us out of another war.
Little liberal, see how much the Democrats love you? They want you drafted and sent to war so they can get their power back by standing on your dead body.

Retention in the all volunteer Military is at all time highs. The Democrats lie and spin and try to make it sound like we don't have enough troops, when all the Military commanders in the field are saying exactly the opposite of the retreat and defeat Democrats.

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Your score is correct, 105 to 0, we are winning this war. The Dems just don't want to see it. Talk down the economy, the sucesses in Afganistan, the sucesses in Iraq. While the Sunni's formed political candidates and demand people participate in the political process, the Bathists and terrorists are retreating. The Dems have distrated us from the real issues and successes of this administration. Why not discuss how we can help the Iraqi economy or their election process or their treatment of people. The Dems focus on why they can't win elections and bring others down to lift theselves up. Enough with the negativity, let us open our eyes, minds and spirits and see what world changing events are taking place, rather than cloud the air with he did this and then he did that...that facist pigdog.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 4:18 PM | Report abuse

To paraphrase: A man would rather meet a tiger on the path than face the Truth.

Posted by: gemini joan | December 12, 2005 4:13 PM | Report abuse

There were many in the Revolutionary war that were traitors. People wanted to hold on to their power bestowed from the King. In fact, it was not until much later, after the signing of the declaration, that becomming a free state was even a thought.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 4:09 PM | Report abuse

If you're keeping score at home, it's now Republicans 105. Democrats 0.

You have all fallen victim to yet another successful Republican campaign of discourse misdirection. Instead of discussing the real issues surrounding their failures and incompetence, they've managed (yet again) to shift the discourse away from those very real problems and onto a debate about the debating swirling around the war. The way they see it, as long as people are discussing irrelevancies and the rhetoric, they won't be focusing on their contemptible ineptitude and feckless management of this nation.

Posted by: Robert In West Hollywood | December 12, 2005 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Mike 234, you don't see that these comments by Dems is fodder for terroists. Jihadists believe that Americans want to kill them, this is proof as the American pig-dogs have admitted. We are in Iraq to help a nation in need and defeat militant Islamists. The Dems have not offered an alternative, only weapons of mass-distraction.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 4:05 PM | Report abuse

In their own words! The bug-out brigade doesn't like having to hear their own words, what a laugh!
They said it, no selective-editing, their own words and they whine when these words are shown to the American people.
The Democrats DO have a strategy: LIE, LIE, LIE when caught WHINE, WHINE, WHINE!!
Scream for America to run away and hide under the couch with them then whine when someone points out that that is cowardly and defeatist.

Murtha is a fraud. He and Pelosi did this same stunt in 2003, both of them at the podium, both saaying the war was unwinnable. Koppel did a half-hour special on Murtha then.
In the N.Y. Times in 2004 Murtha was crying to bug-out.

During the war in Afghanistan it was Kerry and Max Cleland crying unwinnable, nation-building, bug-out, bug-out, bug-out
Now the Dems are using Murtha, poor addled old fella can't remember his lines from one sentance to the next, Dicks and anything with a Military backgound willing to sell out their country for political gain.
They trot their medals on a stick hoping the American public will not be able to recognise this generations Benedict Arnolds.

Just like those cowards hiding behind moth-eaten uniforms, Benedict Arnold was a war hero right up until, like them, he changed sides in the middle of a war.
We hung him.

Posted by: Merna | December 12, 2005 3:58 PM | Report abuse

I hate Bush because he help build the Ballpark in Arlington...facist pigdog...and he traded juice-boy Sosa.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Like most right wingers, American Pride, you think that anyone who disagrees with your dogma is, by definition, unpatriotic. "Your" America isn't America at all.

Posted by: Mike 234 | December 12, 2005 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Why do you libs hate Bush? I dont think it's because of the war. It's because
he's a conservative and that threatens your liberal ways. I will always suport my country
and my president no matter what party he's from. Somebody needs to get rid of killers like Saddam and only the greatest country in the world has the balls to do that. And yes I
did say greatest country. Iv'e been around the world and could not wait to get back to my America.

Posted by: American Pride | December 12, 2005 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Huh? :)

Posted by: Mike 234 | December 12, 2005 3:43 PM | Report abuse

I am Mike 234, the Oracle, I give insight from my elitist throne and believe me no one cares.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Murtha has always avoided the limelight. You may never have heard of Murtha, but believe me, many people in the Pentagon have.

Posted by: Mike 234 | December 12, 2005 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Who's even heard of Murtha before the press picked up on his "plan"? My father was in 'Nam doesn't give him the authority to speak out on an exit strategy. Let's look at the facts of the situation rather than what you feel. Populartiy is a pendulum, but it takes someone to release the stone.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Taxcuts for the rich folks: Bush's taxcuts = increased government revenue, some cut. How about tax reform instead. I'm trying to figure out my altmin liability this year. Trickle-down this secret: Pres. Clinton was a supply-sider. The budget has ballooned since Bush took office, mostly by bi-partisian boondoggeling. $50 mill vs. $3 tril...come on bring it on. Bush's war is a drop in the hat, even at a billion a week. What price is freedom and democracy in the world. One less crazy dictator in the world = my wife, kids and children ;) are safer. Check out the tranportation and agriculture bills. Wasn't it Clinton who wanted to invest in the nation's infastructure. Well Bush is "investing." SS is way overblown. Too many people rely on this failed policy. It's 401k and Roth IRA. Now we are adding a perscription drug benefit that will cost billions. Great just take more out of my paycheck. What about the education bill that Sen. Kennedy praised Bush for and then stuck a knife in the President's back.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Chris--this is totally going to backfire on the GOP. Why? Because the heat that Bush has been taking on Iraq began a while ago and at the grassroots level, not with the Dem party or even with Murtha. Murtha expressed what had by that point culminated into a national outcry. The public sees itself reflected quite a bit in the Dems message, and attacking Dems on this won't do the GOP any good and will, in fact, hurt them.

Posted by: mlb | December 12, 2005 3:19 PM | Report abuse

The Republican majority just passed $95 Billion in taxcuts for top 25% US income & wealth holders, a raise to $165,000/yr for themselves,and cut $50Million from poor & students & Public Health. Who do you think is paying for Mr.Bush's War? Since 2000 the Social Security Trust Fund has grown by
$50Million/yr over what wagearners paid into SSFund in 1998. All loaned out to subsidize the Bush program to bankrupt our Country. War in Iraq is many things but it deserves to be questioned as the GOP Rtwing
plan to defund social programs & increase
domestic and global control of citizens.

Posted by: gemini joan | December 12, 2005 3:07 PM | Report abuse

News flash: Kerry loses Presidential Bid.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 2:52 PM | Report abuse

RC:

You got it dead wrong. Being Anti-Bush is Pro-American.

Calling people "anti-american traitors who aid & abet the enemy" for opposing Bush's
Iraq policy reeks of fascism.

Calling people "cut & run cowards waving the white flag of defeat" reeks of political opportunism by Bushites seeking to capitalize on the Iraqi War.

What's even more amazing to me that a President who's never actually fought in a war and who's National Guard service is seen as unverifiable and a Vice President
who recieved 5 deferments, never served because he was "too busy with other commitments", can have the audacity to criticize genuine war heroes such as Murtha and Kerry.

Is it not reasonable to ask what "stay the course" really means? Apparently to President Bush it means and open checkbook, no timel limits and never letting the iraqi people be responsible for their own security.

Posted by: Left Angle | December 12, 2005 2:11 PM | Report abuse

I agree that Congress has not met its oversight responsibilities.

Dean is doing what someone in his position is supposed to do. Throw bombs at the opposition so your "boys" don't have to. Ken Mehlman does the same.

The RNC is doing what it does best. Go into attack mode. Insinuate, smear and, if necessary, out-right fabricate. (Hey, you can always recant. Not that anyone will notice the recantation.)

I agree also that Dems need to unify and have a message. They are at quandry because they don't have a natural center point for the party. The Presidency always fills that role and in that respect the RNC has a great advantage. We shouldn't get upset if they don't have everyone on the same page, but at the same time there does need to be a unified front presented.

Hopefully we can get some more balance in halls of power soon. I'm of the opinion it is bad for one party, dem or repub, to hold all power in D.C. Our government works best when there are true checks and balances.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 2:09 PM | Report abuse

I hope the RNC keeps up the 'great' work. It reminds us of how weak Republicans are on the why, how, and when of this war. Overt politicization of this war has been a problem for the President from the very beginning, and this kind of thing tends to draw attention to the paucity of real thought involved in prosecuting the Iraq war. Victory! Victory! Rah! Rah! Rah! Hang that fellow from the nearest tree! He's trying to tell us there's no real victory! (300$ billion and still counting the blood and tears; the Iranians perhaps can hardly contain their enthusiasm for our 'victory'.)

Posted by: tt | December 12, 2005 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Sorry Rigo but your argument is hogwash. So to question the president's line on Iraq is to attach the troops? What the hell are we fighting for then? Give me a break.

Posted by: Mike 234 | December 12, 2005 2:04 PM | Report abuse

What the ad says is true . . . of a few democrats, albeit some in leadership positions, including Pelosi and Dean. Anyway, it's not really true of a whole bunch of other Democrats. What is true of most democrats is that they are political cowards and are opportunists willing to put partisan advantage ahead of the nation's interest. That's true of a lot of Republicans as well. It's interesting that it doesn't seem to be true of the President, at least not to a great extent. Perhaps it was in 2000, but there's no doubt that he's grown into the job (that's a big difference between Bush and Kerry). The President refrained from calling out the Dems on the Iraq issue until the distortions threatened the success of the efforts to establish self-government in Iraq -- and that objective is very much in our national interest. That doesn't mean the administration hasn't made mistakes, but the Democrats should consider that if their leadership had been constructive critics and loyal opposition, rather than placing partisan loyalty above national loyalty, we might have had a better policy -- to achieve the same objective, for sure, but there are a few Dems whose input would have been worth having.

As long as the Dems give their biggest, loudest microphones to people like Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosy rather than Joe Lieberman and Hillary Clinton, this is what we're going to get. Two first steps are needed: one, the Dems need to purge the anti-American elements from their leadership, and two, the Republicans need to stop portraying all Democrats as though they're part of the anti-American wing of the party led by Pelosi and Dean.

Posted by: RC | December 12, 2005 1:57 PM | Report abuse

If calling for an end to war is cowardly count me as pusillanimous, lily-livered and gutless. What is cowardly is the lack by Democrats to put forth substantive and convincing arguments against the policies of Bubba and Co. Seems like we are living in more of a dictatorship than a democracy when whatever the Pres want he gets.

Posted by: mark s | December 12, 2005 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Please, someone, anyone, illuminate something for me.

If the Republicans have it right, and us Democrats just want to surrender, just who would we be surrendering to? A handful of bullies who depend on terrorism for what little political power they claim?

Really, who do the Republicans claim we are "cutting and running" away from?

The fact is, these Iraqi elections do not bode well for Bush, good or bad.
Consider the two likely outcomes;

If the elections are disrupted or disreputable, Bush looks like a bufoon.

If the elections go well and a somewhat unified Iraq emerges, no doubt their first agreement will be to invite us to leave tootsweet. They have already agreed to legitimize "resistance" as opposed to terrorism.

And no doubt,Cerebrus' 3-headed neocon littermate, Anterious {Bush(revenge),Cheney(greed),and Rumsfeldt(world dominance)} will no longer be in control of the Iraqi oil fields.

Either way, Bush and his handlers are the only losers.

Not our troops, or our nation as a whole.

Because there really is no one left for us to surrender to, no left to "defeat" us.

We accomplished regime change, which is the only stated goal of this war that has actually been achieved, so why are we stil there. Saddam's in a monkeycage complaining about dirty underwear.

OUR TROOPS DID THEIR JOB! WE BOOSTED SADDAM FROM POWER! ITS A DONE DEAL.

So who are we "cutting and running" from? WHo would be surrendering to?

Can anyone put a label on this enigmatic enemy? Or is it just a convenient apparition invented so we can keep our military bases and oil managers in Iraq?

JEP
PS- why doesn't the link work to the Abramoff money-machine graphic on the Federal Page? I've never had that problem before with the Post online.

Posted by: John Patterson | December 12, 2005 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Everyone asking for a real Democratic strategy.... they're out there. Senator Joseph Biden has two years of concrete policy plans for how to win Iraq. We may not like what Murtha and Pelosi say, but they also have plans. The there's Senator Lieberman that has a plan as well (or at least knows whose plan he supports).

The problem isn't lack of a Democratic plan, it's too many Democratic plans.

Posted by: Dem | December 12, 2005 1:47 PM | Report abuse

I'm returning from a deployment in Iraq and I can tell you without question that when the troops hear the Dems bashing Bush and the war, they take it as bashing them. One Staff Sargent wanted to know what planet the U.S was on with regards to what he was reading in the U.S. press versus what was happening on the ground. There is A TON of good progress being made out here. I just wish the Press and the Dems would report more of it.

Posted by: Rigo | December 12, 2005 1:44 PM | Report abuse

If being in a good position to call our troops terrorists, shrillness is becoming a virtue to Dems. Gratitude can only define a willing accomplist. I doubt that many Dems place creedance on Dean's comments. Dean has nothing to lose as he has no political future and he has failed in his responsibilities as DNC Chair. The elected Dem politicians should step forward to lead the party. See HC more moderate stance or JL...

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 1:38 PM | Report abuse

So only someone who has been to Iraq has a right to a valued opinion? Does our illustrious President's 4 hour turkey stunt entitle him to a hearing?

Posted by: Sandy | December 12, 2005 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Maybe we should look at someone's comments about Iraq that has been over there vs. someone who has never been out of his palatial estate.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Don't worry about the war - read an Iraq newspapers - it will tell you everything is going fine. Great paid advertising.

Posted by: Alice Francis | December 12, 2005 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Ridiculous. Dean was the only Dem in a good position to directly attack Bush's silly immature "Victory" meme, so he did it. The rest of the demure Dems owe Dean a debt of gratitude for changing the subject from how great our eventual victory will be to whether and what 'victory' means, fostering a more grown-up conversation instead of Bush's nationalistic pablum.

Posted by: ST | December 12, 2005 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Most Dems are distancing themselves from Dean. Which is a smart move. Dean has foot in mouth syndrome.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 1:04 PM | Report abuse


An advertisement like this seeks to paint democratic party leaders as cowards. It does not address the issue of whether we should leave now/sooner/later/ever.

When supporting our fellow citizen soldiers, it's important to remember that they are there because of us: they are probably younger, poorer, less advantaged, maybe more conservative than us blog readers, but our government sent them all the same. Because of that, it is our responsibility to decide when to bring them home.

Again, the President started this war. However, we are all on the hook for the bill and we all therefore should both have an opinion and have the ability to voice it without spurious retaliation.

As for the moral ground that a soldier may have in arguing the legitimacy of maintaining the war(e.g., our troops' morale is high, so let's stay in Iraq), it requires much more than high morale to keep the Iraq war going. It requires one billion dollars a week (or so). That's a lot of money that could be used to build, educate, heal, fix, train, return to taxpayers, or whatever.

Posted by: Tom Canick | December 12, 2005 1:03 PM | Report abuse

What is so patriotic about saying our troops are terrorizzing kids, children and women? We should ask Sen. Kerry what the difference between kids and children are.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Just like the swift-boat ads last year, this only goes to prove that over-the-top, out-of-line small ad buys - whether in small tv markets or online - are the future of political advertising.

Why?

Because shows like Meet the Press will pick up on the 'controversy' surrounding the ad, thus pushing it into the national spotlight. Those 'national' discussions really amount to additional, free ad time for those who created them. It doesn't matter that the ads are disengenuous; they do what they are supposed to do - piss off a bunch of people: either those who are going to support what the ad says blindly or those who see them for what they are.

I'm sure this ad cost the RNC less than several thousand, but with all the air play it got yesterday, you'd have thought they shelled out for a million dollar ad buy.

Posted by: corbett | December 12, 2005 1:00 PM | Report abuse

I'm so tired of some of us whiney Dems. I'm such a liberal that I'm off the scale, but I'm so tired of our "leaders" sitting on the sidelines. When will these folks all start speaking as one???? Where is a coherent message? Dems (senators and congress reps) don't appear to support Dean and his statements while Dean is the one getting the majority of support amont Dems. (the people! The VOTERS) What is going on here?

Posted by: Del | December 12, 2005 12:56 PM | Report abuse

I love it...this lovely message from the RNC comes out the same day that the Pentagon and Rummy signal the initial stages of the pullout. Mr. Rumsfeld, how dare you support retreat and defeat? Or, is it simply "mission accomplished" and this is the first steps of "peace with honor"? Getting dizzy?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/12/AR2005121200529.html

Posted by: SWB | December 12, 2005 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Bush should not have traded that balloon-headed steroid freek Sosa...blah, blah, blah

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Nothing new here. Republican operatives always question the patriotism of those who disagree with them. Their goal is to change the subject so they won't have to address the substance of this issue.

You really can fool some of the people all of the time.

Posted by: Mike 234 | December 12, 2005 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Howard Dean's comment was wrong, yet there is more controversy in the Republican use of his statement than his statement itself.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Most of these posts are from people who HATE. Let us rather look at the comments made rather than making shock value comments of why I HATE more than you HATE.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 12:49 PM | Report abuse

All one needs to know is that Bush didn't fire one person involved with intelligence failures resulting in 9/11, not one. Instead of 'slam-dunk' firing George Tenet, he 'rewards' him with a Medal of Freedom. (Principally, in my opinion, to keep his mouth shut by delaying a tell-all book). But history will not be kind on this presidency and its shenanigans.

Posted by: Terry Broz | December 12, 2005 12:42 PM | Report abuse

I disagree with Karen Finney's statement that this is a personal attack. A personal attack is to say some one is a drunk. To replay audio or video of what a politician said on a particuar issue does not even apprach a personal attack. Democrats should stand by what they say.

Posted by: bnenninger | December 12, 2005 12:40 PM | Report abuse

It can't conceivably hurt them, because they're playing to their base. This isn't about facts, it about giving Rpublicans something to feel good about. I wouldn't even call it divisive. It's just a lie. How many lies have we heard from Republicans about Iraq now? 1000? 10,000? Next they'll define 'winning' as establishing an Islamic Republic in Iraq, with Iran as it's chief ally.

Posted by: Victor Venning | December 12, 2005 12:36 PM | Report abuse

This stuff worked a few years ago but at this point it's counterproductive for the GOP. A majority of Americans are now opposed to the war in Iraq. Running ads like that essentially constitute giving the finger to a majority of American voters.

The ad makes the Republican party look out of step with America. Ordinary American voters have decided out that sending American soldiers out into the desert to die has not turned out to be a particularly effective way of 'supporting' them.

As it stands, the ad does nothing since nobody even sees these things. The question is whether this is an approach that the GOP will attempt to use more publicly in '06. If so, it's gonna hurt them and bad.

Posted by: Jackson Landers | December 12, 2005 12:25 PM | Report abuse

The problem is that everything has to be a 30-second sound bite. I would counter the Republican ad by saying that staying and fighting in Iraq would create more enemies and further erode our security. I would go on to counter that pulling troops out of Iraq is not retreating, but helping us win the war on terror, by giving less ammunition to our critics by being there in the first place. Finally, I would point out that if you must call it a retreat, then I would argue that we need to retreat because of the all the mistakes the Bush administration made in fighting this war. We would not even be in this position had we gone into Iraq with a sound plan and 500,000 troops, like was recommended by so many (of course, Bush fired all those people).

Posted by: Drew | December 12, 2005 12:20 PM | Report abuse

When the legislative branch necessarily relies on the executive branch to provide information on which to base decisions, dems would be foolish to champion any course of action without the disclaimer, "Of course, that's what I would do if the information we are getting from the WH is credible." Best for dems to take little hits for having no plan, while the Repubs just flail around in their own feces.

Posted by: jf | December 12, 2005 12:19 PM | Report abuse

The democrats need a stragey on the war half the party is offering mainly criticism, while the other half is not saying anything. The democrats need their own strategy for victory. The legislative branch of government should have ample say in military action.

Posted by: watermelonman | December 12, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

It's sort of like in grade school when a bright student would make an intelligent, rational observation, and the slow kids would respond with, "Yeah? Well, you're a wuss." I agree that if this is a race to the bottom, the dems should join in. Unfortunately, these sort of personal attacks work very well with the Repubs' narrow minded base, who primarily gets their ideas from a picture Bible and the singing bass on the wall of their single-wide.

Posted by: damn right i'm a liberal | December 12, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

There is no sewer deep enough for the Republic Party to troll in their failed effort to hide this administration's mendacity and incompetence. This is the first administration in memory to willfully decide to trash bipartsian foreign policy, substituting a new McCarthyism in its place. I only wonder how much more they intend to compromise our national security and how much more shame they intend to bring to our nation's honor as they carry out a war of choice, with no clear goal or purpose, sold to the American public through misstatements and lies.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 12, 2005 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Republicans are in campaign mode and not in governing mode. Until Bush's numbers go up these types of ads will continue. Too bad they don't spend their money and power on more constructive ideas--like defining what "victory" or "winning" mean to them. It's much easier to make up words and ads then to defend their decisions, leadership and behavior.

Posted by: jenniferm | December 12, 2005 11:52 AM | Report abuse

THE RELIABLE SOURCE WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A RETRACTION OF A PREVIOUS STATEMENT MADE IN AN EDITORIAL.

WEALTHY KIDS WILL NOT BE PUTTING DOWN THEIR SQUASH RAQUETS BUT THEIR LACROSSE STICKS. WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE ERRANT PUBLISHED REPORT.

D.A. PRESS
http://therelaiblesource.blogspot.com/

Posted by: http://therelaiblesource.blogspot.com/ | December 12, 2005 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Maybe the Democrats should post an ad claiming that Republicans want to kill more American soldiers so that Bush won't look bad? If this is a race to the bottom, I say let's go!

Posted by: David | December 12, 2005 11:45 AM | Report abuse

THE RELIABLE SOURCE HAS LEARNED THAT REPUBLICANS.....ALL REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO ENLIST THEIR CHILDREN AND IF APPLICABLE GRANDCHILDREN TO FIGHT THE WAR ON TERROR. A CAUSE THAT THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP BELIEVES IN SO MUCH CAN ONLY BE MET BY SENDING THEIR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN TO THE FRONTLINES TO COMBAT THOSE DIRTY ROTTEN TERRORISTS.

Posted by: http://therelaiblesource.blogspot.com/ | December 12, 2005 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Y'know, the Republicans use this sort of attack often enough that one of these days the Democrats should come up with a way to counter it.

Republicans: "Democrats are unpatriotic!"
Democrats: "Don't call us names!"

Republicans: "Democrats advocate surrendering to the terrorists."
Democrats: "Do not!"

Posted by: J. Crozier | December 12, 2005 11:23 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company