Friday, November 18, 2005

Great googly moogly

I didn't get on the Rep. Murtha pig in a poke because well... other bloggers beat that horse until it became a pile of goo, then proceeded to beat it some more. But just when I thought I was out on a story UPI pulls me back in....

UPI Senior News Analyst

WASHINGTON, Nov. 17 (UPI) -- On Thursday, a Democratic national politician for the first time managed to do what former Vice President Al Gore, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, their running mates and more than $150 million of Democratic consulting and campaign resources signally failed to do in more than five years and two national elections: He mauled President George W. Bush.

"The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It's a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public is way ahead of the members of Congress," said Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania as he called for an immediate U.S. withdrawal from that country.

"The United States and coalition troops have done all they can in Iraq. But it's time for a change in direction," Murtha said. "Our military is suffering. The future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interest of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf region. "

Murtha's blistering speech Thursday could have been easily shrugged off if it came from Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, the late Sen. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, or even Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York. But Murtha had been gung ho for the war and accepted the intelligence evaluations at face value that were presented to Congress arguing the necessity of it.

Dear Marty;

Their is this great website called "GOOGLE" I hear you can do wonderful things like look up old news stories.. you know ones like how Murtha made a almost identical speech last year and has been hesitant about the war since 2002....

The Interweb(aka the timmy)

But you look at this Analysis and it has a very very clear theme "The President is in trouble"... An analysis needs to be based on facts which lead to a conclusion not a conclusion which leads to facts.

THIS is why the President has a low approval raiting. A media which is clearly playing "the anti-war party" better then the Democrats....

But the farce grows in this article.

Now, he has transformed the political dynamics of the Democratic Party. He is the first prominent Democrat since former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean in his meteoric lightning rise and fall in 2003 to early 2004 to attack the president head-on on Iraq. In January 2004 in the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, Democratic voters overwhelmingly repudiated Dean's bold stand against the war and not a single leading Democrat since has dared to oppose it outspokenly and consistently.

Huh... Are you High? What about Nancy Pelosi? Or Kusy Kusinich? Or Russ Feingold?

I am sure if I actually made an effort Marty I could find prominent Democrats who since the war started have been consistantly against it or Critical.

But He says this after the Reid-Pelosi one/two punch on the war makes this comment truely pathetasad. He thinks people who read this ( and since it is mostly going to be in newspapers or blogs making fun of him...) won't remeber back a few weeks.

How stupid does he think people are?

Apperently... very stupid

But Murtha, who has no presidential ambitions -- at least not so far -- has smashed that consensus and that taboo. And he did so only weeks after the indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice president Dick Cheney's longtime chief of staff in the Valerie Plame leak case, and within weeks of the U.S. military death toll in Iraq finally breaking the 2,000 barrier

Murtha's speech was the third of three political body blows to hammer the president in this, yet another "black" week for he man who just a year ago was reelected to a second term with more votes than any American had ever received in history.

Look at how ham handed he is painting the strokes of that brush all the media events such as the libby endightment ( which is now blown apart by Bob Woodward's testimony that he heard Valerie Plame's name from a former white house offical well before Miller did thus ruining the time line) and the artifical marker of the 2000th death.

Its like he is trying to build some obscene chain of dominos to try to negate the reality of Bush's election.....

However the stupidity grows in his article and his disrespect for the reader increases to truely monumental scale.

In the first months after the rapid occupation of Iraq, Hagel was looked down upon by the GOP rank and file as a wild, romantic maverick, and even during the first year of the occupation of Iraq as the insurgency there slowly but inexorably took hold in the Sunni Muslim areas, he was still seen as an isolated eccentric by most of his fellow GOP senators.

Thats right folks... he can't even lie and call Hagel a defector to the cause... but he paints the fact Chuckie still doesn't support the president and made more speeches about it as something that matters.

This is a political hatchet job with one thing in mind -destroy the president- UPI should have made this an editorial or commentary

at least then they could have some respectibility

No comments: