Monday, March 2, 2009

"We Need To Have This Debate..."

In the last few days I have heard from Governor Jindal, several Republican Congressmen and Senators, and even the vaunted Karl Rove, the following phrase when they talk about "Obama's Economic Policies": "We need to have this debate!" A mandated Republican mantra?

What I would like to do is to whisper in each of their ears , "Listen you M....F... stupid scripted automatons we have had this debate. We had it, and then voted on it the first Tuesday in November 2008! It is over, the debate is over, You Lost it. You failed. It is over." Then in about six months I would like to put each of them up on a flat bed truck in each of the towns they represent and hand out flowers and rotten eggs to the audience and let directly vote on their Representative's/Senator's position.

As for Karl Rove I would love to be there when they finally haul Karl off to the Poky.


TStockmann said...

Well, issues aren't settled forever and ever amen. But the Republicans ought to give it until something actually happens and they can argue results. You're right that Obama is being fairly faithful to his campaign positions on domestic and economic matters. You can line me up with teh Democratic congressfolks who aren't happy with his Iraq timetable. especially since by the language surrounding the decision any adjustments are likely to lengthen rather than shorten our presence there. I seem to recall I voted for the most any-war of the three major candidates and i get a plan commended by McCain and Charles Krauthammer. Anyway, color me bitter. What happens when you win the debate than then do what the other side would have anyway?

drlobojo said...

Actually I'm not surprised that Obama's current Iraq withdrawal plan resembles Bush's last plan to withdraw. Bush was scrambling as fast as he could to get back to the center in almost everything he had done. Thus Gates negotiated with the Iraqi's who were demanding an almost immediate withdrawal of the US from Iraq themselves. It took 12 months to withdraw from Saudi Arabia in the early 1990's and we weren't under fire there. Of course no one wants the cut and run of Ford's fiasco in Vietnam.

The important thing is how soon we disengage combat operations.
The only public indicator we will have of this is the U.S. Casualty counts. The tactic(misnamed the surge) employed in the last 6 months has brought that down. I hope to see it actually go to zero in the next few months.

Engaging is easy. Disengaging is hard.

TStockmann said...

It's the extended training and assistance program that makes this particularly unpalatable. Ford's withdrawal and the Congress's decision not to provide lethal aid to the ARVN ensured we had almost a generation before trying the stunt again. Sometimes nothing succeeds like failure.

drlobojo said...

"It's the extended training and assistance program that makes this particularly unpalatable."

Me too.
Which of the five Iraqs will we support when nut crunching coming.

drlobojo said...

But the debate that the Republicans want to have is about whether or not economically it is still "every man for himself" or " we are all in this together."

By the way I suspect we will have a permanant but isolated Military base (maybe two)somewhere between the Kurds and the rest of Iraq and very near the back door of Syria.