Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com   RightArrow - Townhall.com  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
David Limbaugh :: Townhall.com Columnist
Has the Left No Shame?
by David Limbaugh
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Are Barack Obama's friends -- like Bill Ayers -- legitimate political issues?

Has the left no remaining ounce of shame? Its latest target: the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, General David Petraeus, whom Senate Democrats unanimously confirmed.

Remember Democrats faulting President Bush for being inflexible, not following the advice of the generals and having no strategy in Iraq -- never mind that they've never had so much as a paper-napkin sketch of a clue as to what to do in Iraq or the War on Terror? Yet, when he took decisive action that can fairly be said to have addressed all of these criticisms, they reflexively opposed him again, proving once more their allegiance to party over nation.

He replaced Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and appointed Petreaus to implement a new strategy in Iraq, which Democrats tacitly approved in confirming him. But even before the "surge" was fully in place, Democrats declared it a failure.

Now that the surge's military successes are so manifest that even some recalcitrant Democrats have been forced to admit them, they are doing everything they can to obscure those successes and to force a reversal in strategy that would completely erase them.

Some still deny our military gains. Others -- exemplars of legislative excellence that they are -- say the gains are irrelevant because of the lack of political progress by the Iraqi parliament. They are demonstrating an astonishing amount of inflexibility themselves, not permitting the facts to interfere with their bias toward failure nor their partisan interests.

In advance of Petraeus's anticipated report, Democrats not only second-guessed his expected analysis but outright contradicted him, marshaling any and every retired general in sight to impeach his upcoming report. Just once, couldn't they err on the side of victory instead of willfully rejecting positive reports from those closest to the action and in the best position to know?

Democrats didn't just disagree with Petraeus's conclusions, which they hadn't yet seen, but they attacked him personally, both directly and through their surrogates on the far antiwar left, like MoveOn.org, which placed a full page ad in The New York Times calling this genuine America hero and patriot "General Betray Us."

Does that not make your blood boil? How can decent people come anywhere near this infernal group after such a disgraceful attack?

Then again, MoveOn is not that extreme by today's Democratic standards, not to mention a formidable funding source. More than a handful of Democrats in Congress brutally slammed Petraeus in the week preceding his testimony. More piled on as the hearings began.

Sen. John Kerry called the Iraq mission "disastrous." Sen. Ted Kennedy accused the administration, through Petraeus, of "playing for delay." Sen. Chuck Schumer said the violence in Anbar had decreased in spite of the surge, not because of it, and that American troops had failed to protect the "tribes." Too despicable for comment. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
David Limbaugh, brother of radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, is an expert in law and politics and author of Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read David Limbaugh's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Subject: Kucinich
I am starting to hear stirrings that Israel destroyed Syrian nuclear capacity given it by N Korea and Iran and the media is not reporting on it but one is reading it on the internet. So I guess there is a downside to visiting the enemy. He might have been wiped out if he had been sitting in the wrong place.



Abraham Lincoln's "protests"
Abraham Lincoln served in a militia unit during the Black Hawk War. The war was over before his militia saw any action, so it would be a stretch to say that he "fought" in it. He later joked that, during the war, he fought many bloody battles with mosquitoes.

As a young Congressman, Lincoln voted against the Mexican War. However, he did not sink to the level of these liberal idiots currently serving in Congress. Once the resolution was passed, Lincoln felt duty-bound to support it (Duty? What a novel concept to today's society!).

As for Teddy Roosevelt, as another poster has already stated, his only criticism of World War I was that the U.S. took so long to get involved in it. Agree or disagree with him if you choose, but that was his position. He was a "hawk" from way back.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.