Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Q.E.D. The W, Rove And Co. Are Equally Guilty Of Playing Politcs With Our Troops In Iraq, Trotting Out The Surrender Monkey Claims

There is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant, now is there? But we are not talkin about and abortion when it comes to Iraq and introducing a time line to get out.

It's always black and white for the W, Rove and Co and if that doesn't worry you, I don't know what will. Things are much more complicated than simply stating there is only one way to extinquish the Iraq Conflagration.

Springsteen's tune sticks with me here - "Bobby said he'd pull out Bobby stayed in
Janey had a baby wasn't any sin

The W, Rove and Co has their backs up against the wall here with no other options on the table than to veto any kind of funding for the troops in Iraq. Shameful that they are playing politics with the troops, but here they go again.

This is just what I was talking about in the prior post. Have a look:
Q I'd like to ask you about the level of political discourse about Iraq. The Vice President and President are accusing the Democrats of being defeatist, they're talking about surrender dates. Senator Reid comes back and calls the Vice President an attack dog. What happened to the thought that there was going to be an elevated debate; they were going to be more high minded, not as mean spirited?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that what happens in Washington at times of high drama and passion on both sides of the aisle, and on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue, that there are times when you're trying to make your substantive point, that the rhetoric can sometimes lead you to say things that you might not otherwise say in a one-on-one conversation.

I do think that when talking about a surrender date, it is very descriptive of what we believe is in the legislation. It says, you must leave on this day, and we think that that tells the enemy that they've won and that we've surrendered. And I think that's a good way to explain it to the American people.

Q Well, and you say that you're not questioning their patriotism, but by calling them defeatist and talking about surrender, you don't think that that gets close to that line of not --

MS. PERINO: I think that what we have done is argued on the merits and on the substance of our arguments. And I don't know if that's always been the case on the other side. I grant you that I think that tension is high, because the stakes are high. And we feel very strongly that leaving before the job is done is turning over the victory to the enemy. And this is an enemy that, as the President has said many times, people need to understand is not only vying for control of Iraq, is a sworn enemy of the United States being helped by other sworn enemies of the United States, and that we ought to take this very seriously.

Q But don't you think that words matter? I mean, doesn't that suggest --

MS. PERINO: I certainly think --

Q -- "helping the enemy" -- doesn't "helping the enemy" suggest some kind of lack of patriotism?

MS. PERINO: I think if you look at what the President has said, is that we are kidding ourselves if we think that the Qaeda is not trying to create a safe haven as they had in Afghanistan. And by us leaving too soon, before the Iraqis are able to take care of their country themselves, that that is what the President is trying to argue. And I would say that someone who calls the President a liar and a loser does not have very strong ground to stand on in talking about name-calling.


Q When the President vetoes the war supplemental, as we think he'll get it, what does he do then? Will he reach out to Congress and say, okay, here's where we can move from here?

MS. PERINO: I think we'll have to wait and see what happens. I think that both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue are going to have to come together to try to work it out. And I think that both sides recognize that.

Q And when do you think -- how quickly would he veto it after the Senate votes?

MS. PERINO: Let us try to -- we don't even know when we're going to get the actual vote. We have some general idea, but not specifically. I think it's safe to say soon after.

Q Well, "soon after" meaning -- I mean, if the President is at Camp David for the day, would he do it without any ceremony?

MS. PERINO: Let me just say soon after. I don't believe that we're going to be getting it on Friday.

Q Do you think that there would be --

MS. PERINO: I think our indications are that we don't anticipate getting the bill on Friday.

Q Do you envision, though, a formal -- I don't want to call it a ceremony, but for lack of a better word -- event, at this point?

MS. PERINO: We're talking about it, and what we would do, but we don't have any plans yet to announce. We're thinking about it.

Q Okay.

MS. PERINO: But, obviously, the President has said he's going to veto it, and I think that it's important that the American people see him doing it.

Q But this would be only his second veto, and I recall that during the stem cell veto, there was an elaborate event in which he brought families. I'm wondering if you're planning to bring military --

MS. PERINO: A little bit too early for us to preview, since we don't even have the bill yet and we don't know what day that it's coming. It's important.

Q Yes, but you can get it together.

MS. PERINO: We're pretty good. (Laughter.)

Q Just call it a "no surrender" party. (Laughter.)

MS. PERINO: We'll take that under consideration.

Q A great Bruce Springsteen, "No Retreat, No Surrender."

MS. PERINO: I don't think he'd come. (Laughter.)
It's ironic to suggest that others are playing politics with our troops while perpetrating exactly that, isn't it? Oh, and damn straight Bruce would not come to that event, thank goodness.

One other quote from Einstein sticks with me here - "We cannot solve today's problems with the same thinking we used to create them." Indeed!

Blog on friends, blog on all.

No comments: