Add the way Dems handle Iraq to the list of issues they fall on the wrong side.
Just about no one thinks Democrats are able to handle the war properly.
Then, liberals simply make up the claim the Americans want troops out of Iraq.
Well, there are things called facts that usually contradict the made up truth that liberals like to state as fact:
Just 18% said cutting all funding for the war in Iraq to bring troops home would be the best showing of Congressional support.
So there ya go, 18% agree with crazy liberals like Russ Feingold and the crazies that far to the Left who love him.
The poll shows that many Americans want troops funded at full levels.
Keep it up Dems, it won't matter who the Republican candidate is, you'll lose again.
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Survey shows just 3% of Americans approve of how Congress is handling the war in Iraq;
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
15 comments:
So I don't know if you noticed, but I noticed that this poll did not say that 97% of Americans are blaming Democrats for the way Congress is handling the war.
Let's face it. There are only a couple of things Congress can do as far as "handling" the war in Iraq: fund it per the President's request or not fund it per the President's request. Since it takes a super majority to pass anything in the Senate, that means that any inaction in Congress can be blamed on the Republics. And since any bill actually not successfully blocked by the Republics must be passed by the President, only he is to be blame if nothing is happening. The President is unwilling to compromise, and the Senate Republics are his enablers.
The Democrats can and do support the troops by trying to make sure they are properly trained, equipped , and rested. The Republics and the President block these efforts and then have the gall to claim that Democrats don't support the troops.
Nice try, Jim. The fact is is that folks aren't deceived by the self-serving and admin bashing of the Dems and would prefer in addition that they have more to show for their majority than just a minimum wage hike. They're pathetic. The public might not like bad policy, but I think no policy is held in much lower esteem.
Yes, the people are pathetic if they continue to believe the the Republic message, and the Dems will be pathetic if they can't make those people understand the Republic game.
This is fun Game. I'll pick and choose what to quote from the article:
"Dissatisfaction with how the war in Iraq is being handled is also considerable among past or current members of the military and their families – nearly three in four (71%) give the president negative ratings on his handling of the war and than half (54%) said they don’t trust the President’s judgment when it comes to the Iraq war."
That's some good cherry picking, Game.
-42% believe Congress should fully fund the war in Iraq to maintain current troop levels.
-52% favor attaching requirements for phased withdrawal to Iraq war funding or cutting all funding for the war
So, let's see 52% favor immediate or phased withdrawl. 42% favor maintaining current troop levels.
But wait?!?! you said that "liberals simply make up the claim the Americans want troops out of Iraq"
Slightly more than half (54%) believe the U.S. should set a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, and 55% believe the U.S. should begin the phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of this year
President Bush has threatened to veto any bill that funds the war in Iraq that also sets a date to begin withdrawing U.S. troops, but 52% would disagree with a presidential veto, while 44% would approve.
So, are you going to admit that you are wrong?
Because I would admit if I was wrong, but that's due to my intellectual honesty. Some people don't have that.
It's called cognitive dissonance....
It's called comedy responses from the depths of BIZARRO world.Thanks
for providing the good humor this
morning.Yet,cognitive comedy is funny too.The vocabulary being used might be one REAL thing however.I don't have to cherry pick
these great posts are all hilarious.
And yet, once again, you have no argument...
Only insults.
Typical
Scorpion again provides an accurate description of the Game's contribution!
Why would I ARGUE?I enjoy the banter that you do back and forth.
The viewpoints you provide are always comedy enough to enjoy without having to add to the RIGHT ON post that is being provided.Plus
we now have more good humor in attempting to get me in the middle of the tripe being posted.I WILL repeat what I EXPLAINED here a long
time ago---the RIGHT ON posts listed here regularly are really in
need of no more support from me,there are many intelligent posts here supporting this blogs valid and accurate posts.I always enjoy guessing how much time is wasted looking for the comedy posted in response.Hey!!If you don't get it,that's fine.Still,don't be upset if someone is at an age where he can enjoy the jumbled views of people
who obviously are at a point in time that they just don't get it.I
WILL CONTINUE to look forward to the good laughs provided as my supposed dose of REALITY daily,is posted.But,I will always be amazed
there are people out there who really believe the stuff they drag out during their obviously not so busy daily routine.I really don't try to insult,I try to point out how this is enjoyed on a regular basis.When I see an insult,well,it is much more enjoyable to respond to that than the manure being posted.Hey!See you all tomorrow!
Nice spin job, Realism. I prefer to spin it this way:
76% would like to see the war fully funded with 42% attaching no conditions to the funding, while 18% would prefer cutting funding altogether and bringing the troops home. I'd go so far as to say that my way is more accurate as that 76% believes in more support for the troops and their mission. The 18% are the real lefty wackjobs who have their heads up their asses.
Jim,
Speaking of spin, we have your comments of 8/5 @ 7:04PM. The Rebs have no "game", just a respect for the realities of the situation. The Dems HAVE to lie to dissuade the public from that.
Now, that's some dishonest spin. You are grouping together people who support withdrawl with people who don't
I am grouping the people supporting withdrawl together vs. the people who oppose withdrawl.
Like I said before marshall, some people have intellectual honesty and some people (you) don't.
"Now, that's some dishonest spin. You are grouping together people who support withdrawl with people who don't."
Not so. The poll we are both looking at has to do with support for funding, not withdrawal. After talking about support for the troops and funding, it THEN goes on to talk about a pull out. Something your father should have done. (Sorry. But I just love that joke.)
But also consider the plus/minus of every poll, particularly considering how close the last line of that paragraph showed the polling to be, and it's almost a 50/50 split and how does one spin that? So my "spin" refers to how many prefer funding to cutting funding. There's nothing dishonest about viewing it that way. As in most polls, each sees the numbers the way we like to. And as in most polls, they never poll nearly enough people for me to give the poll the time of day.
"There's nothing dishonest about viewing it that way."
Except most Americans don't share your relativist moral principles.
"Except most Americans don't share your relativist moral principles."
This is rich. Hash accusing me of moral relativity.
Post a Comment