House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party's efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.
"I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us,"
Some guy named Luke once said that the wicked will convict themselves…
Kerry, get an education or you will wind up in Iraq…
For the full story in context:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/30/AR2007073001380.html?hpid=topnews
2007-07-31 05:37:10 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The dems are totally invested in defeat...they have put it all on the line and must make everything the President does look bad in order to regain power....but while they are doing this, they are also emboldening our enemy and probably costing military lives which is unforgivable....I hope the American people open their eyes to the traitors in congress and do something about it next election.
2007-07-31 05:42:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Yes, it would be a political problem -- because much of the current support for the withdrawal is based on the fact that no progress is being shown.
If some progress is being shown, then things will split into three camps the "there's not enough progress", the "there is enough progress" and the "let's wait and see".
The current solidarity is based on the fact that nothing so far has worked -- and thus there is no end in sight. If it becomes possible that an end may be in sight, no solidarity.
And remember, Democrats don't stick together just based on party loyalty (the way Republicans tend to) -- they vote based on the facts of the moment.
2007-07-31 05:42:36 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Does anyone here believe that Gen. Petraeus is going to be allowed to give a bad report???? Come on people, he was planted there by GWB for this very reason. I expect a glowing report, tempered with a lot of bs and blabber about how we have more to do but we are making strides. I feel for Gen Petraeus, because he has only one choice and that is to be as vague as possible. We already know the government of Iraq has accomplished nothing and is now on vacation till Sept. 4th.
2007-07-31 05:50:28 · answer #3 · answered by World Peace Now 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Pretty bad when the party that wants to take control of the White House is basing their campaign on more body bags and losses in Iraq. Shows what the leadership of the party has in store for us till 2008 more ways to make us lose just as John Kerry wanted when he lied about US military events in Vietnam during his congressional testimony during that war. And how do Democrats and the far left loonies feel now that there favorite paper has said the surge is working (the New York Times of yesterday reported on the success of security in regions the surge was working in)
2007-07-31 05:43:54 · answer #4 · answered by ALASPADA 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I think it's a moot point, for our troops to succeed, they'll need a Commander in Chief who can define success. Apparently Mission Accomplished wasn't it. According to the Intelligence Report given to Congress this month, only 8 out of 18 of the goals for Iraq were met by the deadline. If you read the report, they were being a little generous with the 8.
2007-07-31 05:47:38 · answer #5 · answered by Beardog 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think he is correct. All of the Dems that supported the war to begin with will return to that position and the Dems who have gone too far out to left field, Murtha, Reid, Pelosi, etc... will be left out there to fend for themselves. It would seriously impede any timetable for a troop withdrawal and also weaken their shot at the White House.
2007-07-31 05:44:40 · answer #6 · answered by The Oracle of Delphi 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Many Democrats they stand for withdrawal, and/or have said Iraq is a failure.
This would prove them wrong, and reinforce the notion that they are not competent to handle national security.
It's bad enough to keep repeating a belief that the war is lost. It's even worse to appear to hope for it, to improve one's political chances.
2007-07-31 05:43:25 · answer #7 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, we all know how much the Democrats switch their stances on things. We also know that their whole political agenda for winning the presidency is based off of failure in Iraq. So yeah, the next year and a half should be very interesting.
2007-07-31 05:42:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I think they are scared that soon the people will realize that it is very much possible to win the war and ensure our safety , when they realize that they will realize democrats didn't study this issue enough and almost wasted trillions , all the soldiers lives , and the people votes on something that will definately make our future safer
2007-07-31 05:43:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Egads.
The democrats would have to turn their attention to domestic issues and the economy.
Problem? More like dead in the water.
The economy is what got them thrown out the last time.
2007-07-31 05:45:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋