General Patraeus was confirmed and deemed acceptable by the Democrats in Congress.
They passed a bill that required the President to submit a report based on findings of General Petraeus.
Democrats were sure that the Presidents surge plan would fail, so they lets things go forward.
Now that the surge will probably be reported as a success, the following is the future of General Patraeus.
1. Democrats will have to start trashing his credibility. He is seen as favorable by Americans, so Dem's have to take the guy they confirmed (Petraeus was unanimously confirmed as a four-star general and MNF-I commander on January 27. [9][10]) and start saying he is simply a Bush stooge.
2. They will have to start saying that the report is just a political stunt because it comes from the White House. Interesting, since it was a Democratically controlled Congress that made it law that the report be given from the President.
Here is how the law is written: It also clearly states that the president "will prepare the report and submit the report to Congress" after consultation with the secretaries of state and defense and with the top U.S. military commander in Iraq and the U.S. ambassador.
Here are the stories of Democrats already scarred of the report, and trying to make sure that the American people do not believe there is any improvement in Iraq. It must really suck to be a person voted into office by Americans, but have to cheer for the enemy.
US Democrats slam 'political spin' over Iraq report
Early Clash Brewing Over Report On Iraq Progress
3. In no way can they give any credit to Patraeus or the President, because their entire political careers are vested in the US defeat in Iraq.
Friday, August 17, 2007
The future of General Petraeus
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Another bunch of hogwash. I think the entire country would give Petraeus the benefit of the doubt. The problem is, the White House itself has absolutely no credibility anymore. Why would anyone believe anything they say?
If it comes from the president, I'd be "scarred", too.
their entire political careers are vested in the US defeat in Iraq Baloney! I'm sure the Democrats would like to see ANY kind of real success as long as it IS real. There are absolutely no good solutions to this mess. Whatever the Dems inherit in 2009, it's not going to be pretty.
cheer for the enemy? Yeah, right.
well, so far I am correct...
You can simply SAY that I am full of it, and I will keep showing you quotes and links and facts...then you can go back to fantasy land
"and I will keep showing you quotes and links and facts..."
The problem is, game, you never really deliver on these promises. And you frequently pronounce yourself an expert on this topic or another, without really demonstrating this or giving us any sort of way to verify this. You utter your opinion on whatever subject, and then you begin to insult your posters and call them names.
Why?
I only do that on one topic, since I have published works that required quantitative research (just because I quickly type this stuff doesn't mean I can't write journals)...
Otherwise no...
And there ARE LINKS IN THIS VERY STORY
Stop spinning around the issue and comment on what is being talked about...otherwise don't bother.
47% is not a favorable rating, and those people are along ranking him higher than his predecessor, and he's just the latest in a long line of Cheney-puppets. Rumsfeld is still very much in command-Bush gave him a nice new office the day after he fired him-so there's no delusion on the part of anything but a tiny remnant of the American people that the Iraq occupation is being led any less poorly than before.
Do you deny the distracting, insulting comments you have made in this very thread, even though they are clearly visible above?
Nobody cares about your published works or your quantitative research here. Just supply the necessary feedback and clarifications to your commenters HERE, preferably sans attitude.
You simply don't like being challenged by parklife and myself, and want excuses for the other liberals to make us disappear.
If the favorable is almost 50% and the negative is in the 20's, that is favorable....
I gave evidence of my three points, you commented on ONE, but giving your personal opinion which can not be backed up by anything. So basically, you made my point.
If you already forgot my point, go back and read it in the post.
Post a Comment