I was going to give this up. This was going to be the year that I got re-focused on my career, when I stopped obsessing about politics. This is stupid.
I think about this way too much. I get on this stupid site and I write my stupid opinions. It gets me nowhere. In fact, it gets me worse than nowhere as I have to take personal abuse from people I thought were my friends.
As far as I can tell, I've got maybe three readers. My commercial prospects are, shall we say, limited.
Then I read something like this and I think I've got to comment.
I can't imagine too many Dems or anybody else can be very happy with the leadership they've elected. They've steadfastly refused to offer any solutions on Iraq, while standing aside and letting the President escalate troop levels, while simultaneously undermining any psychological boost the surge might give our troops and the Iraqi's risking their lives for freedom.
Nice work.
One thing I'd like to see is some clarification of the message. Are we doing the wrong thing? Or are we doing the right thing wrong? Many critics of the war that I speak to or read point to the continuing bloodshed in Iraq as somehow proving that it was the wrong thing to liberate Iraq. Does that mean an action is only right if it's easy? Most great change in history has only come about at great cost.
Couldn't it be that we are doing the right thing, but that evil, desperate people are resisting what we're trying to do precisely because they understand that our success means the end for them?
I'm wondering also when the public at large will grasp that the Democrats are more interested in defeating George Bush than they are in winning in Iraq.
Time and history have a way of confounding cynics. No one is going to say that this Administration has performed flawlessly. It may even be true that Democrat bureaucrats are somehow more efficient (though I doubt it)than Republican. But the simple truth is this: when this President faced a crisis, he chose to act. Not to negotiate, not to obfuscate, not to triangulate, but simply to take aggressive action against our enemies.
Imagine how different things might have been if Bill Clinton had chosen to do the same thing.
I think about this way too much. I get on this stupid site and I write my stupid opinions. It gets me nowhere. In fact, it gets me worse than nowhere as I have to take personal abuse from people I thought were my friends.
As far as I can tell, I've got maybe three readers. My commercial prospects are, shall we say, limited.
Then I read something like this and I think I've got to comment.
I can't imagine too many Dems or anybody else can be very happy with the leadership they've elected. They've steadfastly refused to offer any solutions on Iraq, while standing aside and letting the President escalate troop levels, while simultaneously undermining any psychological boost the surge might give our troops and the Iraqi's risking their lives for freedom.
Nice work.
One thing I'd like to see is some clarification of the message. Are we doing the wrong thing? Or are we doing the right thing wrong? Many critics of the war that I speak to or read point to the continuing bloodshed in Iraq as somehow proving that it was the wrong thing to liberate Iraq. Does that mean an action is only right if it's easy? Most great change in history has only come about at great cost.
Couldn't it be that we are doing the right thing, but that evil, desperate people are resisting what we're trying to do precisely because they understand that our success means the end for them?
I'm wondering also when the public at large will grasp that the Democrats are more interested in defeating George Bush than they are in winning in Iraq.
Time and history have a way of confounding cynics. No one is going to say that this Administration has performed flawlessly. It may even be true that Democrat bureaucrats are somehow more efficient (though I doubt it)than Republican. But the simple truth is this: when this President faced a crisis, he chose to act. Not to negotiate, not to obfuscate, not to triangulate, but simply to take aggressive action against our enemies.
Imagine how different things might have been if Bill Clinton had chosen to do the same thing.
posted by alwaysright at
6:41 PM
1 Comments
