Lame-duck George Bush delivers swift kick in butt to anti-Iraq-war donkeys Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi on funding for troops and mission in Iraq.·
By Jim Wrenn,
Editor and Washington Bureau Drawer Chief at PoliSat.Com.
December 20, 2007--
Embed this video on your site/blog-- see below.
*support troops; support Bush oppose the left*
Victimized by their own self-defeating strategy in the November, 2006, elections (i.e., recruiting a number of non-leftist Democrat candidates to defeat vulnerable Republican incumbents), Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi succumbed to "lame duck" George Bush's political power (revitalized by increasingly undeniable evidence of success of the "surge" in Iraq) by passing legislation including Iraq-war funding without attaching strings to snatch defeat from the gradually closing jaws of victory. (More reports about this are here, here and here.) Is Bush a "lame duck" on steroids or have the donkeys morphed into baby turkeys? Did politicians catering to the far Left go a bridge too far? More likely a series of bridges too far.
After similarly having failed to attach such strings more than six months ago in the wake of their months-long holding of funding for our troops and their mission hostage to demands of the far Left, they re-doubled their efforts (as do most idealogues) and reprised their legislative hostage-taking tactic last September, which they continued until yesterday. Rather than proving method in their madness, they've proven madness in their methods matching the madness of the far Left in both methods and goals.
To whom do we owe thanks that "lame-duck" Bush proved able to kick the donkey's butt? We all know who deserves credit for the successes that overpowered the claimed clout of the defeatists. Successes our troops generated withstood the fanatical, pedal-to-the-metal assault against them and their mission by the propaganda machines of the Hollywood Left. Also deserving credit are General David Petraeus, Vets for Freedom, and many, many more.
Is there hope that increasing numbers of Americans misled (in 2006) by the most massive propaganda campaign waged by self-perceived American elitists against American troops and their mission since Vietnam are beginning to catch-on just as they did in the waning weeks of the 2004 election campaign? Yes, there's hope, but it's far, far too soon for those among us who support our troops and their mission to declare "victory" over such propaganda.
Realists know our enemy is desperately seeking to launch attacks that such propagandists and their like-minded allies in the so-called "mainstream" media would eagerly equate with the "Tet Offensive" in Vietnam. We must be ready not to only defeat such "offensive" (as our troops did do in Vietnam) but also to defeat its use as a propaganda tool against our troops and their mission (which our leaders failed to do in the wake of the Tet Offensive). We know our troops and their mission are worthy of our support. The question we must ask is whether we will prove to be worthy of them.
--Jim Wrenn, Editor and Washington Bureau Drawer Chief at PoliSat.Com.
link to this installment: