Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
David Limbaugh :: Townhall.com Columnist
Racing for Defeat
by David Limbaugh
Forward Print Share Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will Sarah Palin make a run at the GOP Nomination in 2012?


I hope those who dismissed the consequences of a Democratic takeover in Congress last November are beginning to see the error of their ways. With each passing day the Democratic leadership is becoming more extreme and urgent in undermining America's cause in Iraq.

President Bush's 21,000-troop surge is well underway, and its accompanying strategy to secure Baghdad proceeds apace. Now, more than ever, our troops need our moral and spiritual support. Now, more than ever, Democrats -- and a disturbing number of Republicans -- are withdrawing it. Their actions are unconscionable.

Two weeks ago, we saw their failed resolution denouncing the build-up of American troops in Iraq. Over the weekend, they tried again, unsuccessfully.

On Friday, the House passed such a resolution by a comfortable vote of 246-182. But when Senate Republicans succeeded in blocking the resolution in the Senate, Democrats threw a tantrum, saying Republicans were stifling debate.

Why is it so hard for these people to tell the truth? Republicans didn't shut down debate. They did the opposite. They refused to allow cloture on the resolution because Democrats refused to allow consideration of other proposals. It is their way or the highway.

Republicans were quite willing to allow a vote on the Democrats' resolution if Democrats would have permitted a vote on the Republican's resolution pledging not to de-fund the troops in Iraq. But Democrats refused because the GOP resolution would have compelled Democrats to take a more meaningful stand and prevented them from having it both ways on the issue.

So far, Democrats have positioned themselves as winners if the surge doesn't work, but protected themselves if it does by stopping short of cutting off funds. But a vote on the GOP resolution would have forced their hand: getting them on the record on the funding issue.

If they voted for the resolution, they would infuriate the base. If they voted against it, it would be much harder for them to pretend they support the troops. That's why it was projected to draw the grudging support of some 75 Democrats. They had to block a vote on it.

Voting for a resolution pledging not to withdraw funding would also show the abject meaninglessness of their resolution opposing the surge. There is no greater dagger to the heart of self-important politicians than to be exposed as insignificant. Continued...
1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Forward Print Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
David Limbaugh, brother of radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, is an expert in law and politics and author of Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read David Limbaugh's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Join The Debate!

Post Your Comment
(155 comments so Far)
View in ascending order     View in descending order
Reply # 1
Date: Feb 21, 2007 - 11:21 AM EST
Liberty and Bobbit
So we agree on the basic underpinnings of the chaos in Iraq. We also seem to agree that Bush is essentially the architect of that chaos. Good. But what's the next step.

To me, the saddest aspect of this is that we have to wait for a new president, whether democrat or republican, to begin to stabilize the situation and repair it. Surge or no surge, it is no major change in course, and while it may have some benefit I tend to agree with those who say the American people have lost patience with the war and will not give it enough time to work.

I have said in other posts that the suggestions that Biden and others (including many conservatives) for federalizing the country but still allowing a great deal of autonomy for the internal government of kurdish, shia, and sunni regions is now the best possible of many bad end games. The sticking point has been how oil revenues would be shared among the regions, but that seems to be close to being worked out. Also, recent studies of seismic data using modern techonology not available to Hussein's regime seem to show that the Sunni regions actually do harbor some reasonable amount of oil deposits that they could develop. This could be very important since without their own source of oil revenue the Sunnis have been reluctant to trust the Shia majority to share the wealth with them.

Again, I am not saying this is a perfect outcome, or even one that should be a permanent solution. One would hope that after a cooling off period that nationalist sentiment and goals would trump sectarian differences and the boundaries between the regions would become less important over time. Also there is and will be refugee issues as the population migrates into areas they perceive as safer based on the sectarian identity in the short term. But this is already happening, particularly in Baghdad where there were mixed neighborhoods and we are powerless to stop it.

I am convinced that this approach is not only the best among alternatives, and that it is essentially inevitable unless we want to pour in much more than 20,000 troops to impose some alternative.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 2
Date: Feb 21, 2007 - 10:23 AM EST
As Much as I like Newt

.....I think he is too polarizing and therefore unelectable .....the Dems and moderates would rally around the nominee to defeat Newt ...

.....I think Guiliani would capture those moderates that won't vote for Newt and gives Republicans the best chance to win the White House in '08 ...Guiliani/Santorum in '08 .....COLOSSUS
Flag as Offensive
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
 *
State:
 *
Zip:
 *
Phone:
       
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.