Oh, so reasonable is this TV con :eyes:
snip>
From the start, Democrats ought to concede one big point: Absent any readiness on their part to cut off funds to the troops in Iraq, those forces will be there as long as George Bush wants them to remain. Once that point is conceded, Bush should be called upon to pay some attention to the Democrats' demands -- and the public opinion that supports them.
At a minimum,
he should say he is willing to enforce on our Iraqi allies the requirements everyone knows are necessary steps for a political settlement of the internal conflict: the agreement on distribution of oil revenue, the promised amendments to the constitution, the creation of local and regional governments.
Bush should indicate publicly -- for the sake of American public opinion and as a clear signal to the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki -- that without those pledges being met, he cannot justify the sacrifices American troops are making.
And Bush should reinforce Gen. David Petraeus's promise to keep Congress apprised of the situation in Iraq by offering -- and keeping -- his own
pledge to give Americans regular, honest briefings on the progress there.
That is not an ideal solution, from anyone's point of view. But something like it is probably the best compromise available that takes into account the muddled political situation our elections have created......http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/09/AR2007040901002.html?hpid=opinionsbox2Damn voters. Say one thing (reportedly), then years later -years further along into a bloody war- say something else!
Some cons with very big voices are still unwilling to admit that credibility isn't something that can be restored by louder clapping.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
