What’s the Plan, Man?
As I mentioned in the previous post, Rahm Emmanuel was on GMA this morning and was unable to articulate clearly the Democrats’ plan for Iraq. What, you say, the Republicans have been in charge for the entire course of this war and haven’t had a plan and don’t have one to get out and, if a Democrat has an idea, is immediately dismissed as a cut-and-run, al Qaeda-cheering, unpatriotic liberal traitor and no one calls them on it? P-shaw!
Look, as has been said many times I’m sure, the Democrats need to talk articulately about these things, even if they are shouted or no one listens, no matter the fairness of the other side not being called to task about the same things. For Iraq, here’s a close approximation of what I would say, if I were Rahm Emmanuel:
Iraq is not an easy situation, and a solution can’t be reduced to a sound bite, and the Democrats and myself know this. The reality is is that is no black and white situation, as George W. Bush wants it to be, much like many things in life. But we’re committed to doing something about it.
Unlike what the media says, we have ideas. Jack Murtha has a plan, and you can check his House Web page for more specifics, to redeploy and contain our soldiers in Iraq. Jack Murtha, a decorated war veteran, a man referred to as “the heart and soul of the military,” and someone who had the respect of both parties until he differed with the Republican president, was called a cut-and-run traitor by the Republicans when he suggested this plan last year. Congresswoman Jean Schmidt, an Ohio Republican, referred to him as a coward when he was offering the start of a Democratic plan, what you, the media, and Republicans have been clamoring for us to do. Let me tell you, in case you don’t know, it’s hard to have your voice heard when you’re the minority in both chambers of Congress and the President is of an opposite party. Right now, we don’t control the committees, we don’t control what legislation hits the floor.
Since the Iraq situation is complex, Democrats have a lot of different ideas about what to do. Some call for a timetable to exit, some call for immediate withdrawal, and some call for more troops to secure that country. But we don’t call for “stay the course,” which was the Republican idea until they found it didn’t poll well and they stopped calling it that.
And let me be frank—the media, following the talking points of Republicans, keeps saying, the Democrats don’t have a plan for Iraq. That’s flat out wrong and is a statement made to make it look like we’re somehow weak. Weakness is not admitting you’re wrong, weakness is not doing anything differently when things are going poorly, weakness is attacking and calling your fellow Americans disparaging names when they have different opinions.
Here’s where the legislative role comes in, and something that will look weird to you, the media, and Republicans: we will discuss it on the floor and work out a compromise and do what’s best for the U.S. A legislature that upholds its constitutional responsibilities and is not a rubber stamp for the President. Amazing, huh?
If you want a sound bite, for what’s it worth, here it is: the Democrats are committed to getting, at minimum, the bulk of our troops out of Iraq as soon as possible. This is not “cutting-and-running,” as it will be called, but a sensible overall strategy for extricating ourselves from this poorly managed, disastrous war.
Now I challenge you to ask the Republicans what their plan is if they maintain control of Congress. If it’s “stay the course” or some other wording of the same idea, ask them why they are sticking with a failed plan.
Look, as has been said many times I’m sure, the Democrats need to talk articulately about these things, even if they are shouted or no one listens, no matter the fairness of the other side not being called to task about the same things. For Iraq, here’s a close approximation of what I would say, if I were Rahm Emmanuel:
Iraq is not an easy situation, and a solution can’t be reduced to a sound bite, and the Democrats and myself know this. The reality is is that is no black and white situation, as George W. Bush wants it to be, much like many things in life. But we’re committed to doing something about it.
Unlike what the media says, we have ideas. Jack Murtha has a plan, and you can check his House Web page for more specifics, to redeploy and contain our soldiers in Iraq. Jack Murtha, a decorated war veteran, a man referred to as “the heart and soul of the military,” and someone who had the respect of both parties until he differed with the Republican president, was called a cut-and-run traitor by the Republicans when he suggested this plan last year. Congresswoman Jean Schmidt, an Ohio Republican, referred to him as a coward when he was offering the start of a Democratic plan, what you, the media, and Republicans have been clamoring for us to do. Let me tell you, in case you don’t know, it’s hard to have your voice heard when you’re the minority in both chambers of Congress and the President is of an opposite party. Right now, we don’t control the committees, we don’t control what legislation hits the floor.
Since the Iraq situation is complex, Democrats have a lot of different ideas about what to do. Some call for a timetable to exit, some call for immediate withdrawal, and some call for more troops to secure that country. But we don’t call for “stay the course,” which was the Republican idea until they found it didn’t poll well and they stopped calling it that.
And let me be frank—the media, following the talking points of Republicans, keeps saying, the Democrats don’t have a plan for Iraq. That’s flat out wrong and is a statement made to make it look like we’re somehow weak. Weakness is not admitting you’re wrong, weakness is not doing anything differently when things are going poorly, weakness is attacking and calling your fellow Americans disparaging names when they have different opinions.
Here’s where the legislative role comes in, and something that will look weird to you, the media, and Republicans: we will discuss it on the floor and work out a compromise and do what’s best for the U.S. A legislature that upholds its constitutional responsibilities and is not a rubber stamp for the President. Amazing, huh?
If you want a sound bite, for what’s it worth, here it is: the Democrats are committed to getting, at minimum, the bulk of our troops out of Iraq as soon as possible. This is not “cutting-and-running,” as it will be called, but a sensible overall strategy for extricating ourselves from this poorly managed, disastrous war.
Now I challenge you to ask the Republicans what their plan is if they maintain control of Congress. If it’s “stay the course” or some other wording of the same idea, ask them why they are sticking with a failed plan.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home