Let's see if we can't cause a few more lefty heads to explode (I love that sound):
The Democrats engaged in endless efforts to make sure the war really was lost. They failed. Now it looks as if the war, despite the Democratic Congress's best efforts, may well be won. It's the congressional Democrats who are the losers. And so could be the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee. Are the American people likely to elect the candidate of a party that has tried its best to lose a winnable war?May I remind my readers that after Vietnam the Democrats only elected two Presidents, and one of those was because of the gross malfeasance of a Republican (if you don't know who I am talking about, blame a history teacher).
Simply put, the public does not put candidates from a party that loses wars in the Oval Office.
Thus, General Petraeus' success is the Defeatocrats' loss. That's why the "General Betray Us" ad, and Rep. Stark's comments, and so on. They are desperate, and thrashing about as desperate people do.
|