Here's more wankery:
Much was made of Cheney's venting, and it is a bit too easy, after six years of this bilge, to dwell on the Vice President's aura and miss the essential felony of the Bush White House--that it has tried to run a war without bipartisan support. Indeed, it has often attempted to use the war for partisan gain. To be sure, there is some grist to the Republican portrayal of Democrats as a bunch of wimpy peaceniks. All too often in the post-Vietnam past--the first Gulf War, for example--the default position of the Democratic Party has been to assume that any prospective use of U.S. military power would be immoral. But Bush's initial post-9/11 response was not one of those times. The invasion of Afghanistan and an aggressive effort to destroy al-Qaeda were supported by just about every Democratic politician. Many leading Democrats even gave Bush the authority to invade Iraq, although most did so, I suspect, for reasons of political expediency. One of the most convincing arguments offered by the bloggers is that the Democratic establishment should have been far more skeptical than it was about a pre-emptive, nearly unilateral assault on an Islamic country.
Ah Joe. You are SUCH a wanker. YOU urged the war. You urged blind allegiance to Bush. You are part of the problem.
More.
In 2004 Bush and Karl Rove managed to flummox the Democrats by conflating the war in Iraq with the war against al-Qaeda and insisting that any Democratic reservations about Iraq were a sign of weakness. This was infuriating. It was Bush's disastrous decision to go to war--and worse, to go to war with insufficient resources--that transformed Iraq into a terrorist Valhalla. It is Bush's feckless prosecution of the war that has created the current morass, in which a U.S. military withdrawal could lead to a regional conflagration.
No shit wanker. And why did it work? Because of people like you and Joe Lieberman. You are part of the problem.
More
Rove may avert another electoral embarrassment this November with the same old demagoguery, but his strategy has betrayed the nation's best interests. . . .
There isn't much point in detailing the chest thumping of the various blognut extremists. Their reach is minuscule, largely limited to the left's upper crust, and their angry spew is beginning to seem sooo six months ago.
Yes the chest-thumping. Pfft. I do see why you don't want to recite anything because it is not pleasant when so many got it right when you were stunningly, embarrassingly wrong. Of course discussing THAT is out of bounds for you.
And you know what else you can't deal with? The reality of Joe Lieberman. You claim the argument was about triangulation. Of course it is not. There is no triangulation in Lieberman. He is all Republican. You decry Dick Cheney and ignore Lieberman doing the exact same thing. Did you miss this Klein?
If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England," Mr. Lieberman said at a campaign event at lunchtime in Waterbury, Conn. "It will strengthen them and they will strike again."
Of course you did you wanker. But so what? You are so six years ago. How's irrelevancy feel? Enjoy it, you wanker.
Comments are closed on this story.