Murtha: I've Been Vindicated

It's hard imagining how Murtha believes that but that's the impression this Washington Times article suggests. This part of the opening paragraph gives us the news:

Democratic strategists yesterday said a revised proposal to begin withdrawing some U.S. troops from Iraq by year's end is a more appealing campaign position than an immediate pullout that draws little voter support. "That is how the Democrats are going to frame this debate for the voters and that's the choice before them in this election," former Clinton administration official John Cowan said of the proposed withdrawal, which was outlined Monday in a letter to President Bush from top congressional Democrats.

Here's why they've gotten a new direction:

"Only 19 percent of Americans favor an immediate pullout" and "only 30 percent of Democrats favor that option," Gallup reported at the end of last month. That poll also found that 38 percent of Americans support staying in Iraq "as many years to do this as are needed" and an additional 7 percent want to send in more troops.

When a fifth of the population wants an immediate pullout and half the people want to either increase troops deployed in Iraq or at least staying as long as it takes, the electoral message was clear. This re-inforces a longheld belief of mine, namely that Democrats are for the inevitable. Democrats can be in favor of a policy that's the polar opposite of Republicans right until they see a poll showing the public siding with Republicans. Then they believe the same thing as Republicans.

That isn't the picture of leadership that's needed to win undeniable mandates, which is what Democrats need this November. Voters won't take them seriously when they're seen as panderers without a set of core beliefs. That's why the so-called value voters voted overwhelmingly for President Bush and Republicans in 2004. That margin isn't likely to shrink much this time around. You might say that this is the Democrats' latest 'cut-and-run' plan, with them doing the running.

Now for Murtha's whopper:

Murtha said in a statement Tuesday that the party's campaign position on Iraq validated his earlier position and that he was satisfied that his colleagues agree "we must change course in Iraq."

Here's more of that statement:

Murtha, in a statement released by his office today said he was satisfied that his colleagues agree "we must change course in Iraq." He noted that his was not a popular position when he first stated it in November , "But I've thought all along, it was the right thing to do for our country, particularly the courageous fighting men and women in our military.

Murtha said, "Things are not getting better and what we Democratic leaders are saying is that we must set a new direction in Iraq. America is not safer today because of the war there, we must refocus our resources on fighting terrorism more effectively."

Jack, Your position still isn't popular. Only a fool thinks that garnering 19 percent of the voting public's approval qualifies as verification of one's position. If that statement had any more spin on it, it'd corkscrew Murtha into the ground.

As for this perceived new direction, that's utter nonsense. Troops will eventually start coming home when Iraq is able to defend itself. That's hardly a change of plans. It's just an eventuality that hasn't happened yet.

---

Posted Thursday, August 3, 2006 4:00 AM

July 2006 Posts

Comment 1 by DUH at 03-Aug-06 07:27 AM

Hey, dumbass... politicians are SUPPOSED to follow public opinion. They aren't supposed to follow their personal opinion no matter what (like so many Reps FORCING _their_ beliefs on others). Politicians in a democratic society are not only supposed to be sensitive to the opinions of their constituents, they are supposed to SUPPORT and CONVEY, if not ENDORSE and VALIDATE, these opinions. Politicians are not voted for because voters know their opinions will always be the best (regardless if they align with their own opinions), it is because they AGREE with the politicians' opinions. The politicians' job is to do what the majority of the constituents want. That is Democracy, the political system the USA is SUPPOSED to run under. Not forcing their ideas on others; that's fascism (or what you would call the Republican party's stance).

Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Aug-06 10:42 AM

Forgive me for not taking you seriously. I just couldn't after reading the part about politicians are supposed to follow public opinion. That isn't leadership; it's pandering.

In Murtha's case, he's taken a consistent position but it's a position taken solely for political expediency. The American public noticed that & reject his position because it's so intellectually vacant that it's indefensible.

You might want to check into the form of government we have. It isn't a true democracy like in Britain or Israel. We have a constitutional Republic. Elections aren't about deciding issues per se. They're about choosing the people who actually make the decisions.