Why won't the Dem's admit the surge is working? Have they no faith in our troops?Are they traitors to America?

Question

With the success of the surge in Iraq becoming more evident with each passing day, a new ailment has gripped the Mainstream Media and the liberals: Surge Derangement Sydrome (SDS). The earliest known case of SDS occurred on April 23 when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid responded to a question by CNN's congressional correspondent Dana Bash about whether he would believe General David Petraeus if he reported that the "so-called surge" is working:

REID: No, I don't believe him, because it's not happening. All you have to do is look at the facts.


Well, as we do look at the facts that the surge is working, the MSM and the liberals are showing more signs of severe SDS. Some of these SDS signs have been noted in the August 9 edition of Investor's Business Daily, 'Surge' Critics Perhaps Were Bit Premature:

Do Democratic opposition leaders keep blaming each other for voting for the Iraq War? Or are they now talking about expanding military operations to other countries?

Sen. Hillary Clinton once was damned for voting to authorize the war in Iraq. But her even-more-liberal rival Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., now expresses his own willingness to invade nuclear Islamic Pakistan.

...we have heard from the House's majority whip, Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C. He's worried that Gen. Petraeus' good news about the surge might be "a real problem for us" — "us" being anti-war Democrats. And at a congressional briefing, when Gen. Jack Keane reviewed the positive signs from the surge, Rep. Nancy Boyda, D-Kan., walked out on the testimony.

She complained that there was "only so much that you could take . . . after so much of the frustration of having to listen to what we listened to."


The SDS symptoms in the media have ranged from shock to feigned apathy, both of which examples were chronicled yesterday by NewsBusters Senior Editor Tim Graham. In the category of SDS shock is the stunned reaction on Wednesday of CNN American Morning anchor John Roberts when he heard Senator Dick Durbin state that there is military progress in Iraq:

But hold on. Let me back you up there. You said you did see military progress?


When Durbin confirmed that there was military progress with the caveat that there was little political improvement in Iraq, Roberts remained flustered:

I understand all of that. But Senator Durbin, everybody in the Democratic Party is saying that the surge has failed. Senator Casey, do you agree with your colleague that there are some signs of military progress here?


Unfortunately for Roberts, Senator Bob Casey was unable to ease his severe SDS with his confirmation that there was military progress in Iraq. In fact, Casey might have made Roberts' SDS even worse when he ridiculously suggested that now that the surge is working, it is time to change course from successful military policy in Iraq:

The problem here is that the President of the United States continues to insist on stay the course policy, no change in direction, no sense that the American people can determine that there's a light at the end of the tunnel. That's why I think there's a bipartisan agreement right now to change the course. I think the president should listen to the will of the American people.


In the feigned apathy category of SDS, we have the example of Matt Lauer. During his questioning of Senator John McCain on yesterday's Today Show, Lauer came up with this SDS gem:

There are some people who say, Senator, that the momentum, right now, in Congress is so strong to pull the troops out of Iraq that it doesn't matter what's in that report, in the middle of September from General Petraeus, or even in reports that follow that. Even if we start to change momentum in Iraq and start to see more success, the momentum in Congress is already so strong that it's unstoppable. How do you feel about that?


So now that the surge seems to be successful, Lauer is claiming that it doesn't really matter. His SDS is making him portray a successful surge as an obstacle to the liberal goal of leaving Iraq as quickly as possible. It is almost as if some commentator in 1944 stated that the successful landing in Normandy didn't matter. Of course, that didn't happen because no one suffered the equivalent of SDS in 1944.

What is the future prognosis for this severe ailment among the left? SDS will most likely continue to worsen until it reaches a fever pitch when General Petraeus makes his report to Congress on the progress of the surge in September. Shock, anger, and feigned apathy will be among its many symptoms as SDS takes its toll among the left.

NewsBusters.

Answer 1

The Democrat politicians keep a large, white handkerchief on their person at all times...to be ready, just in case they meet an Islamic nutcase on the street to whom they can surrender.

Answer 2

Mr President, It's nice to see you are spending your long weekend online. I hope you hang out for a while and read about what has been going on in our country. Check out youtube while you're here, there is a lot of funny stuff up there and I'm sure you could use a laugh. Though, your post above is pretty funny, in a very sad sort of way. Anyway, good luck with the surge. We couldn't stop you from doing it, but we liberals really, honestly would prefer that something you did would work out. We love our country, and it hasn't been easy these past 7 years. Keep reading, some important issues need your attention. - A liberal American patriot.

Answer 3

Patraeus has not issued his report yet -- and we keep being told that we cannot evaluate whether the Surge is working until we hear that report.... right?

Or do we just base out analysis on the fact that violence is still rampant, we're still losing 2~3 American soldiers per day, the Iraqi govt is on vacation, which is probably the only thing stopping yet another faction from quitting --- how is any of that "working"?

Does the concept of measurable goals really mean nothing anymore? The Surge has not accomplished its stated mission -- to make Baghdad free from violence -- so, how is that "working"?

Answer 4

How many hours a day does the average Iraqi have electricity? In Baghdad, it's about one hour. How about running water? Again, in Baghdad, it's often not available for days at a time.
This, people, is more than four years after we "liberated" Iraq.
If we can't even restore the power grid in four years, how can we expect to restore peace?
The surge will be shown to be working. The people in charge have instructed those under them to make this happen.
Figures will be manipulated, have no doubt.
The simple fact remains. We have no business in Iraq and never did.

Answer 5

I find this question absurd, supported by no evidence for the success of the surge other than bald claims from propaganda outlets. The actual facts do not support this claim. Readers should follow the real news at places like these:

http://antiwar.com/
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
http://www.ifcongress.com/English/index.htm

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo/

Answer 6

The so called surge will tend to suppress (not eliminate) terrorist action only as long as our troops are there. As soon as we leave it will be business as usual. We are sacrificing huge amounts of money and the lives of our soldiers for a pipe dream. Your comparsion between the "surge" and the Normandy invasion is ridiculous.

Answer 7

Why is it that you never mention the Republicans who say the same thing? Or say that we need to pull our troops? Sen. Luger, Sens. Hagel of Nebraska, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Gordon Smith of Oregon.

Answer 8

The real truth,

And I hope Democrats and Liberals read this..

Most Democrats have invested in seeing the failure of Iraq coming to fruition.

Think about. They know that if Iraq is a success, it will make them really look bad politically. It will be perceived that cannot stand strong during tuff times. That they could not stand with America when the road got ruff.

That is why they want Iraq to fail...because they have set their whole political platform based on its failure. They don't want it to be a success...and that is sad............that they would rather see Iraq fail so they can be successful politically.

You Democrats and Liberals be truthful to yourself for once. You know what lies in the hearts of men. You know what I say is true. Wake up. You know they are banking on it to be a failure. Don't deny this to yourself. You have to ask yourself the hard question....Are the Democrats in right on this?

Answer 9

Liberals will accept no opinions that are different from their own. Truth is irrelevant.

They read it on DailyKos or the NY Times so it must be true.....

The only problem with your question is that you are asking it to a pack if immoral liars. Its not working because "they" say its not working.

Of course the more informed people would rather hear reports from the people in the field. They say its working wonderfully and I believe them.

Answer 10

Blah blah blah... Democrats deranged blah blah blah anti troops blah blah blah... light at the end of the tunnel... blah blah.
Every true American supports our troops. Fortunately not every true American agrees with your views. All true Americans would agree you are entitled to them, but gee you are long winded.

Answer 11

Yes. In July 06 there were 43 dead American soldiers. In July 07 there were 80. More dead = hard work bein' worked on!

I believe there will be a lot of young soldiers sacrificing their lives for our President Bush's noble legacy and I feel fine with that.

5 more today. So What!?! They volunteered.