Tuesday, April 03, 2007

The anti-Schizophrenia Drugs wore off... again

In Firmly in control, I illustrated the egregious and schizophrenic behavior of many on the left side of the Congressional aisle.

Over the last few months, Democratic leaders have begun acting even more erratically.

In November 2006, Nancy Pelosi chose Silvestre Reyes as House Intelligence Committee chairman. Reyes promptly told Newsweek, "We're not going to have stability in Iraq until we eliminate those militias, those private armies. We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq. I would say 20,000 to 30,000-for the specific purpose of making sure those militias are dismantled, working in concert with the Iraqi military."

Next, the Democrats in the Senate gave unanimous confirmation to Robert Gates as defense secretary.

On November 30, the Democrats' Senate leader, Harry Reid, said, "We're not going to do anything to limit funding or cut off funds."

On December 17, Reid, said it was reasonable to send more troops to Iraq: "If the commanders on the ground said this is just for a short period of time, we'll go along with that."

In January, the Senate confirmed Army General David Petraeus 81-0.

Well. I suppose times have changed. Or the anti-schizophrenia drugs wore off - once again. Once the commanders requested a surge of troops for -- yes -- a short period of time, Reid promptly reversed himself. The National Ledger observes that Reid has decided to cut off funding for American troops while they are at war. The liberal democrat said Monday he wants to cut off money for the Iraq war next year, making clear for the first time that Democrats are willing to pull out all the stops to end U.S. involvement. Playing to his far left base, the US Senate leader said Monday that he will join forces with Feingold, one of the party's most liberal members who has long called to end the war by denying funding for it.

This really shouldn't come as much of a surprise. Between 1998 and 2004, key Democratic leaders changed their tune on Saddam Hussein faster than Michael Moore can down a Biggie-sized Wendy's Triple.

* * *

Writing at the National Review, Kate O'Beirne observed:

Rather than back a non-binding resolution of disaproval, why didn't the gutsy Senators, like Chuck Hagel, who are riding the surf of public opinion opposed to the troop surge and taking on a president with approval ratings at the freezing level vote aginst General Petraeus' confirmation? Their convictions hold that he has endorsed a wholly unjustified escalation and will be leading troops on a futile mission. They want a role in the conduct of the war and with the need to win Senate confirmation of Gen. Petraeus the Constitution has given them one, but they have taken a pass.

It shouldn't come as much of a surprise, given their egregious track record of flip-flops.

One hopes that a knowledgeable M.D. in Congress can prescribe some Lexapro, a drug typically used to combat bi-polar disorders.

No matter. It's crystal clear -- even to the Left -- that the American people can't trust the Democratic leadership to hold a position longer than they can hold their breath.

They're a joke, but America's military isn't laughing with them.

Oven-baked good readin', just like Mama used to make:
Anchoress, Astute Bloggers, Atlas Shrugs, Captain's Quarters, Discerning Texan, Gateway Pundit, Hang Right Politics, OTB, Wizbang

No comments: