Does that sound like a catchy campaign phrase or a soundbite that a politican will make hay with? How about "Army, broken, worn out, living hand to mouth?" Compare this to "No substitute for victory." In the age of short attention spans and short message politics it seems as though the tide has once again turned.
In the space of 2 weeks the Democrats have squandered what appeared to be an advantage to be exploited in the 2006 midterms and turned it into an albatross hanging around their necks. That albatross is Congressman John Murtha. The party has been on the slide again from the moment Murtha uttered the words "complete withdrawal." It seemed like gold for a fleeting moment as the leftist media fawningly described Murtha as a committed hawk who had a change of heart and realized his mistakes and was now coming to his senses.
His change of heart was short lived however when given the opportunity to express his feelings on the floor of the house via a non-binding resolution, Murtha along with over 200 other Democrats could not find the nerve to cast even a symbolic vote.
The slide continued as Murtha, apparently relishing his new found fame as a national media darling uttered the following hogwash. Speaking in Latrobe, Pa., Wednesday, the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee and Subcommittee on Defense said troops in Iraq are "barely getting by," and won't be able to meet future military threats to the country, according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. If Murtha is to be believed, the most technologically advanced and well supplied military in the world cannot sustain 130,000 men in combat. Since Murtha is on the committees whose responsibility it is to make sure this is not true then perhaps it is time for the congressman to retire if he is not up to the task.
When then Democratic Senator Zell Miller excoriated the Democrats at the Republican national convention, Democratic strategist James Carville said "I feel sorry for that poor old man" perhaps James is thinking the same about Murtha.
All the usual suspects have jumped on the Murtha bandwagon, Nancy Pelosi, Hapless Harry Reid and the Post and Times all see Murtha as "changing the debate" on Iraq. Unfortunately for the Democrats prominent members of their own party are recoiling from Murtha as fast as possible. Bill and Hillary Clinton along with John Kerry have all rejected such a foolish course of action and even the French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin chimed in with his opposition.
The most vocal of the Democrats was Sen. Joe Lieberman who had this to say, "I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood." This eye witness account for some reason could not be found on the pages of the Washington Post or New York Times.
Forgetting for a moment what the out of power people had to say let's look at what the boss had to say. In an address at the Naval Academy in front of a group of people he must lead, President Bush did not equivocate. "To all who wear the uniform, I make you this pledge: America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am your commander in chief."
More importantly than speeches however is a clear cut plan for achieving our goals. Look herehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/iraq_strategy_nov2005.html
and you will find what many have said does not exist. This is clearly identified plan entitled National Strategy for Victory in Iraq. Unless the Democrats can come up with a document that clearly articulates a plan of action that is superior to this one, the party is going to remain fractious and directionless heading into the mid terms.
