The dishonorable Kristol
By Michael J.W. Stickings
From The Raw Story, here's Krazy Kristol bashing Republican dissenters yesterday on Fox News Sunday: "The idea that they will get credit for deserting the war at this point, they voted for the war, they voted to fund the war, now they're going to what? Vote for withdrawal, for surrender... It's a ridiculous political calculation, as well as dishonorable one. The Democrats are behaving terribly, but the Republicans are behaving foolishly."
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
Republicans who are now fed up with the Iraq War aren't looking for "credit," they're looking to cover their asses heading into '08. They know already that the war is a losing issue for them. As political calculation, it's not "ridiculous," it's sensible. Voters may not accept what they view as convenient conversion, but abandoning the disastrous status quo is, it seems to me, a risk worth taking. Is it "dishonorable"? Perhaps, if what is driving the dissent is pure political calculation. Where were many of the dissenters back when the war was not yet the losing issue it is today? Still, it would be even more dishonorable to continue to support the status quo -- that is, Bush's war -- no matter what. Better dissent, whatever the motivation, than groupthink.
I am tired of repeating myself, but withdrawal is not surrender. That withdrawal is surrender is just the warmongering talking point, and Kristol and his ilk repeat it ad nauseam. Having been wrong about pretty much everything, all they can do now is dismiss the dissent and smear the dissenters. Whenever Kristol opens his mouth to spew this sort of nonsense, all we get is more evidence of his own dishonorable failure.
From The Raw Story, here's Krazy Kristol bashing Republican dissenters yesterday on Fox News Sunday: "The idea that they will get credit for deserting the war at this point, they voted for the war, they voted to fund the war, now they're going to what? Vote for withdrawal, for surrender... It's a ridiculous political calculation, as well as dishonorable one. The Democrats are behaving terribly, but the Republicans are behaving foolishly."
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
Republicans who are now fed up with the Iraq War aren't looking for "credit," they're looking to cover their asses heading into '08. They know already that the war is a losing issue for them. As political calculation, it's not "ridiculous," it's sensible. Voters may not accept what they view as convenient conversion, but abandoning the disastrous status quo is, it seems to me, a risk worth taking. Is it "dishonorable"? Perhaps, if what is driving the dissent is pure political calculation. Where were many of the dissenters back when the war was not yet the losing issue it is today? Still, it would be even more dishonorable to continue to support the status quo -- that is, Bush's war -- no matter what. Better dissent, whatever the motivation, than groupthink.
I am tired of repeating myself, but withdrawal is not surrender. That withdrawal is surrender is just the warmongering talking point, and Kristol and his ilk repeat it ad nauseam. Having been wrong about pretty much everything, all they can do now is dismiss the dissent and smear the dissenters. Whenever Kristol opens his mouth to spew this sort of nonsense, all we get is more evidence of his own dishonorable failure.
Labels: 2008 election, Iraq, Krazy Kristol, Republicans
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
7:44 AM
1 Comments:
I actually think our dear friend is right on both counts. It is dishonorable to suddenly repudiate a policy against which you had never demurred even slightly simply because it's politically expedient to do so. And no one will be fooled (leastways I hope not) when the Congresional Republicans suddenly pull their support from Bush after years of the most abject and uncritical lockstep support (with a few honorable and well-known exceptions).
By
., at 8:20 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home