If you have not read the latest post from Charles Bird, please take the time to do so. While it is typically not my style to so profusely editorialize, it is a compelling, thought provoking piece discussing communication of the war in Iraq. Overall, this compendium begins to provide a basis for more fundamental questions from supporters of the Democratic Party: how will the tactics mentioned affect their electoral landscape?
One of the Democrat’s primary tactical objectives, and I believe errors, is to equate statistics such as the President’s popularity rating with an overall ability of their party to succeed in en masse electorally. Certainly the purported genius of Emmanuel and Schumer has accounted for such problematic and untenable concomitance, despite their sincere belief our President is the sole cause of this nation’s problems and we are engaged in an “unwinnable” situation in Iraq. In fact none of this is being lost on an audience who is certainly listening, but may ultimately determine that strong leadership is not necessarily equivalent with popularity.
The reaction to statements such as Harry Reid’s a “the war is lost” comment is wide ranging and problematic in several distinct ways. On a philosophical level, it causes an intellectually honest individual to question both the motivation and sagaciousness of Mr. Reid and the holistic party positions he supports. Certainly, taken in full context with the atrocious statements other Democrats have made with respect to this war and our President it provides ascension to several thoughts including; why are they so invested in this nation’s failure, why is there such a resounding lack of articulated solutions and finally where are the current majorities accompanying achievements?
Leadership can be the quintessential judge of overall expectations from a larger, associated parochial group. Accordingly when a plurality of that group is acting in substantial agreement with the leadership’s position, stakes for failure based on overall policy success are greatest. In this situation, an inability to successfully prove one’s basic tenets are well founded can result in displaying the underlying philosophy is egregiously flawed and should be rightfully relinquished. Irrespective of this wisdom, Democrats have embarked upon their long road undeterred and thus seemed determined to follow it all the way to an abysmal end. They have invested themselves in the failure of our country and armed forces. They have questioned their own judgment in pursuing and voting for this war. They have lost their nerve, blinked and remain inconsolable with respect to formulating a comprehensive policy that echoes the sentiment of most Americans. In following, I can find very few of my countrymen believing “cut and run” or “slow bleed” or “defunding the war” are plausible options. Ultimately, this does not resonate with very many American’s, especially not an electoral plurality. It also does not supplant or complement the populaces’ personal notions or feelings about war in general.
However, for Democrats to change course now would admit a certain level of agreement this administration and return America to a shared vision for the future. It would provoke a realization that while indeed making some mistakes and perhaps disagreeing on tactics; the current conduct has been correct in intentions and overall objectives. It would hearken us back to days when Democrats agreed with policy and an AUMF approved in a wise bipartisan act grounded not in parochial politics, but steeped in a shared concern to protect our countries citizens. It has since been degraded by most Democrats into a cheap political stunt, mired in misleading statements about facts, circumstances and intentions none, of which come close to approaching the truth.
However, it is doubtful we will see acquiescence to the thoughtful and cooperative spirit of yesterday; for that could prove fatal to Democrats electoral strategy which appears primarily vested in their anti war base and sundry fringe groups, which do not look like a plurality of America. It is defined by the very nature of its stake in losing, derision and negativity. Their strategy lacks a vision which satisfies our countries overall majority and thus will fail miserably to produce victory in any collective sense. It is bankrupt of ideas and focused on showing that almost nothing existing as a result of Republican leadership is good; not the substantial improvements in safety, gains made in defeating the enemy or even an economy with record growth more than fully recovered from the post September 11th crash. Taken in complete context, it is almost incomprehensible that our populace has not or will not eventually see through the political slight of hand and achieve a personal epiphany which reveals Democrats actions as a comprehensive ruse.
Historically reviewing the consequences of war, there are many repetitive factors very relevant to our current situation. First, American’s despise war; the longer wars drag on the less popular they become. Second, wars are never fought with perfection and mistakes are almost always made. In the latter our public is certainly less forgiving; insomuch that miscalculations made in war generally cost lives. Certainly, these factors place us in the time of discontent we face today. Yet this leads us to a more important point; once convinced an engagement is necessary Americans do not want to lose or finish in a manner which leaves us less safe and causes us to revisit this fight another day. That makes the initial engagement no more than a fruitless exercise in which a job started and paid for in lives and treasure yields no results. Furthermore, that is not an indecisive or intransigent tact; it is the epitome of leadership and strength.
To follow this through to a logical and conclusive end which makes us safer and ultimately stronger for the future requires leadership; a characteristic which is the hallmark of our current President and a majority of his supporters. It will carry us forward, despite the opposition’s best efforts.
Recent comments