Democrats skipping briefings on Iraq Updates

posted at 12:40 pm on April 23, 2007 by Bryan

Sen. Harry Reid says that the war is lost, then backtracks.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi declares that the road to peace is through Damascus, and offers to meet with Iran’s apocalyptic pirate president but declines to meet with the President of the United States.

Together, these two and their allies are doing all that they can to de-fund the war in Iraq through the Jack Murtha “slow bleed” strategy.

Call all of that what you want, but it doesn’t amount to supporting the troops. It amounts to supporting the enemy.

Ignoring briefings on the war by Gen. David Petraeus, the commander whom Congress recently approved and whose strategy is now governing ground action in Iraq, doesn’t amount to supporting the troops either. But that’s just what the Democrats are doing:

The commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, returns to Washington this week, but last week Pelosi’s office said “scheduling conflicts” prevented him from briefing House members. Two days later, the members-only meeting was scheduled, but the episode brings to mind the fact that Pelosi and other top House Democrats skipped a Pentagon videoconference with Petraeus on March 8.

The Democrats did the same thing on April 9: Only one Democrat Senator attended a video conference with Gen. Petraeus which was an update and progress report on the war.

What can be a higher priority than hearing from Gen. Petraeus? Can’t they make Petraeus’ briefings a priority, just for show? Apparently they would rather meet with Code Pink than Gen. Petraeus.

The Democrats wanted power but didn’t want any responsibility, but in winning power they have also earned responsibility. This war is being fought on their watch now, too. If they support the troops as they always say that they do, the least that they could do is treat the war as a priority worth studying and understanding, and worth hearing about from the man most responsible for its execution. They shouldn’t rely on media reports or groups like Iraq Body Count, but that’s apparently just what they’re doing.

AJ Strata calls the Democrat’s lack of attention to Petraeus’ briefings “criminal.” He’s right but it’s even worse than that. We’re seeing a complete abdication by the party in power on the seminal issue of our time. They’re running toward defeat now and running on defeat for 2008. We’re seeing a gradual abandonment of the Iraqi people, of American troops in the field, and ultimately of America’s place in the world. The Democrats are making a monumental error that will change the world for the worse. Defeat in Iraq, which is how the Democrats are casting the effort even while they dodge reports from the architect of the American strategy there, will echo for decades to come.

Update: Instapundit–

The goal, I think, is to ensure that the war is seen as a failure, but to make sure that Democrats don’t get blamed.

Yup. And that’s called “abdication.”

Update: Reid speaks.

Reid, the Senate’s top Democrat, released excerpts from a speech today in which he calls on Bush to abandon his threat to veto the war funding bill and negotiate a compromise. Reid delivered the speech on the war in Iraq at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars in Washington at midday.

Reid did not repeat his assertion last week that “this war is lost,” a comment that drew sharp criticism from Republicans, who branded the Senate majority leader as defeatist. But he mixed sharp criticism of Bush with praise for Congress’s efforts to end the conflict and appeals to antiwar voters to be patient.

“Be patient…we’re losing this war just as fast as we can!”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Harry Reid looks like the typical movie big government villain. He’s got “bad guy” written all over him.

Privatestock on April 24, 2007 at 9:59 AM

It matters not what we in this country think about the actions and words of the Dems, it matters what the enemy thinks of their actions and words.
And to be quite honest, in listening to them and watching them, the Dems that is, joining the jihadists seems to be the right thing to do, afterall I want to be on the winning side and I don’t hear Al Queda talking about quitting or pulling funding or giving press briefings explaining how deplorable their equiptment and morale is.
Damn maybe we are fighting for the wrong side.

LakeRuins on April 24, 2007 at 10:26 AM

OT but IMPORTANT

Redstate posted this last night and I have not seen it on many blogs.

The “most open Congress in history,” Nancy? Where are the cameras?

They have linked a NRSC video asking the Dems What are You Afraid of.

CBS News also wrote about it.

Broadcasters Protest TV Blackout Of Iraq Negotiations

ordi on April 24, 2007 at 10:43 AM

Reid heckler arrested on terror charges
Well okay it is a different Reid, and a different country but hey it got your attention right?

A controversial activist who heckled John Reid is believed to be among six men arrested early this morning in the London area on suspicion of inciting terrorist offences.

Abu Izzadeen, born as Trevor Brooks in Hackney, east London, to a family originally from Jamaica, came to public attention last year for interrupting the Home Secretary when Mr Reid visited East London to urge community elders to tackle the radicalisation of young Muslims and watch out for suicide bombers in their midst.

The 31-year-old convert called Mr Reid an “enemy of Islam”.

LakeRuins on April 24, 2007 at 10:51 AM

So the Democrats skip briefings but they say the President only hears what he wants to hear. Someday, the Democrats will learn what the word irony means but don’t worry, they still won’t be embarrassed.
President Bush needs to call them out on this though; screw the new tone; his terms almost over. Their negligence needs to be thrown out there in a big forum. Make them address it.

austinnelly on April 24, 2007 at 11:23 AM

I say he needs to appoint John Bolton as press secretary while we wait on Tony to return.

LakeRuins on April 24, 2007 at 11:44 AM

Maybe when congress is through with their circle jerk around Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman they will have some time left over to look into this.
Green Beret dies while training for marathon
Associated Press
Published on: 04/23/07

A Green Beret originally from Lawrenceville died while training for an upcoming marathon in Nashville, his family and friends said.

Sgt. 1st Class Andy A. Haney collapsed and was unable to be revived Saturday after an 11-mile run, said his mother, Mary Campbell Haney of Lawrenceville. He was 29.

Friend and fellow runner, Al Hamilton, said they were training Saturday for the upcoming Country Music Marathon with a YMCA group. He said Haney complained of leg cramps, but then had to be taken to the hospital.

Mary Haney said results from an autopsy were not available, but she had spoken with her son last week and he had not complained about any health problems.

“He was an avid runner,” said Mary Haney. “It was just something that could not have been prevented.”

Haney joined in the military in 1996 and became an Arabic translator and a paramedic.

He served two tours in Iraq after being assigned to the 1st Battalion, 5th Special Forces Group at Fort Campbell, Ky.

At the time of his death, Haney was a member of the Special Forces Reserve Unit based in Alabama. He was attending Nashville State Community College and hoped to try out for the Nashville Fire Department.

“He was just always somebody who could make you laugh,” his girlfriend, Alicon Lee, said. “Even when I was mad, he could pull it together and find some funny comment to make.”

A celebration of life service is 1 p.m. Wednesday at First Baptist Church of Lawrenceville. Haney will be buried at Gwinnett Memorial Park in Lawrenceville with full military honors.

LakeRuins on April 24, 2007 at 12:07 PM

Well ain’t his special
Kuchinich bringing charges of impeachment against Vice President Cheny and needs some help and look who is testing the waters.Why none other then that first Muslim elected from the Islamic state of MN.
But didn’t the Dems say this was not what they were about, you know hearings and investigations and impeachments? Didn’t they campaign on something like changing lanes or cross dressing or something like that?

LakeRuins on April 24, 2007 at 12:33 PM

http://www.cagle.com/working/070406/lester.jpg

William Amos on April 24, 2007 at 4:21 PM

We are incapable of winning any war, no matter what the conditions.

It has nothing to do with military capabilities or strategies or commitment.

It has everything to do with politics. Fact is the dems play political football with the war for their own selfish reasons. We could win the war in minutes. But like Vietnam, we shoot ourselves in the foot.

The enemy sees this and merely plays the game..pushing buttons whenever and wherever they feel. This low grade, guerilla by design, wears us down. If we want to win the war we much not concern ourselves with world opinion or worry about collateral damage. Just get it over with.

But we don’t have the balls to do it.

serenevalley on April 24, 2007 at 7:52 PM

It should be obvious that many, possibly most, Americans do not have a stomache for a long drawn out war. Historically there has been a strong isolationist thread in our societies fabric. Both of these factors do not bode well for the future in Iraq and for our country.

docdave on April 25, 2007 at 6:30 AM

Can’t find a place to post this anywhere else, but is it just me that finds “Miss Malkin in a cheerleader uniform” the most memorable moment so far? :)

SuperManGreenLantern on April 25, 2007 at 9:58 AM

What happens when the Islamo fascists don’t accept the Dems surrender?

LakeRuins on April 25, 2007 at 10:41 AM

ANNUOUNCEMENT:

Coming to TVs all over America, a sequel to the movie When Harry Met Sally, which is a movie about a couple who don’t find love for 13 years.

The TV sequel is called When Harry Met Nancy, But Not Petraeus, which is a movie about a couple who find hate for the military over 6 years, and decide to kill the military’s messenger by refusing to meet with him.

It is a heart-warming story of back-stabbing, denial, and slow-bleeding the military to a point that they can no longer defend themselves.

In the ensuing years, you will see thousands of Iraqis slaughtered as Harry and Nancy proclaim: “we now have peace in our time”.

So don’t miss it. You’ll scream. You’ll cry. You’ll barf.

It’s bound to win an Emmy for the year’s Best Hate Story.

pocomoco on April 25, 2007 at 2:12 PM

The Democrats cannot be entrusted with power and responsibility. They are disasters waiting to happen.

Phil Byler on April 25, 2007 at 5:32 PM

So the FUBAR senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV)stated:
“WE LOST THE WAR.”

OK Harry, then please answer:
WHO WON THE WAR?

byteshredder on April 25, 2007 at 7:16 PM

Harry Reid is a traitor and should be given the Rosenberg treatment, preferably the Ethel Rosenberg treatment. Ride the lightning Harry, ride the god damn lightning all the way to hell.

Rock on…………

doriangrey on April 25, 2007 at 9:36 PM

So… they don’t have time to meet with the COMMANDING GENERAL of allied forces but she DOES have time to meet with the despotic tyrant currently in charge of the terror state, Syria. What?!?

“When Harry Met Nancy”

Now that’s funny, I don’t care who you are.

Mojave Mark on April 26, 2007 at 12:28 AM

She’s a muder and a granmuder who knows how to protect the American people. What a muder.

Captain America on April 26, 2007 at 2:12 AM

Au contraire, mon ami! Why should the Dems listen to Petraeus? After all, Chimpy tells him what to say and Karl tells him how to say it. The road to Peace leads anywhere Bush isn’t. And, without giving any specific alternate strategies, they’ll ride that (silky?) pony ’till 11/08.

eeyore on April 23, 2007 at 2:07 PM

It doesn’t surprise me that eeyore speaks French, I would have guessed that without the French intro just by reading his posting! Don’t worry eeyore, just keep your white flag handy until brave American troops come to your rescue and liberate you from the facsist Islamic concentration camps…if you survive that is! America, Saving Europe’s ass since 1917!

Gosh darn, ain’t that beautiful, record surplus (Clinton) to record deficits with Bush. And you are talking about Reid is a traitor? FOOLS.

gmcjetpilot on April 24, 2007 at 5:06 AM

As for the above quote, since gmcjetpilot brought up the subject of “traitors” and Clinton’s wonderful budget surplus it provides a perfect segway to a common delusion liberal-thumbsuckers keep espousing:

If Clinton had used his “family jewels” while in office for things other than playing hide the cigar with Monica and chasing anything in a skirt (or possibly even pants for that matter!) and concentrated his time and effort at conducting the people’s business he would be bragging about how his administration killed or captured Osama and not bragging that “we almost got Osama” while he was in office!

Instead, Clinton was spending most of his time answering for his numerous indiscretions while in office instead of conducting the business of leading our country, and most importantly, he was distracted from his most important duty, protecting our people and country!

The popular cry from the liberal-thumbsuckers is “9-11 happened on Bush’s watch” but any rational thinking person with one functioning brain cell would be able to see right through that paper-thin argument as the math is simple. First of all, Bush was in office only 9 months when 9-11 occured, Clinton was in office 8 years prior to the Bush administration, do the math or “google it” as your hero Tokyo-Rosie would say! The 9-11 plot (albeit a simplistic plot) would have required much more time than 9 months to plan and carry out, so whose watch did 9-11 really occur? Strictly speaking, yes, the 9-11 attacks occured during Bush’s 9th month in office, however, Clinton had 8 years and numerous opportunities to take out Osama and possible avert the worst attack on our soil in American history, so why couldn’t he get it done?

This is where Clinton’s “budget surplus” he and the liberal-thumbsuckers are always bragging about comes in. As most know the dems are well known for funding lots of costly “social programs” (read liberal-thumbsucker “I don’t have to work money”) and yet Clinton’s administration was able to fund all these government handouts and still maintain a huge budget surplus…any thinking mind would have to ask…how is that possible?

Here’s another bit of information most know, Clinton always has been and always will be a pacifist, therefore he always has been and will always be anti-military and anti-intelligence agency. Clinton was able to brag about his administrations huge budget surplus because he stripped our military and intelligence agencies to the BONE!! So is it any surprise with Clinton being so distracted (hide the cigar with Monica, etc.) coupled with the fact he cut our military and intelligence spending to the bone that Osama and his band of murderers were able to continue plotting and planning things like the Cole bombing (which in-of-itself was an act of war against our nation that Clinton did nothing about) and 9-11?

Bottom line is jmcjetpilot, much of the responsibility for 9-11 and the continued threat we face from facsist Islam lies more with Clinton than Bush! Clinton sacrificed our nations safety and security because of his deep hatred for the military and intelligence establishments, he shirked his duties so he could chase skirts while all the time bragging about his precious budget surplus you and Clinton hold so dear, yet I’m certain if Clinton or you asked, most of this nation (especially those who died on 9-11 and their loved ones) could care less about the budget surplus you and Clinton hold so dear…I’m certain they would tell you it wasn’t worth the price of admission! As far as traitors and treasonous acts are concerned, in addition to Reid, Pelosi, and Murtha being treasonous traitors…we must not forget to include “Slick Willy” in this rogues-gallery, in fact, Clinton should be at the front of this parade of SHAME!

So grow up, wake up, and smell the Islamic Facsist burning books, music, and DVD’s before it’s too late jmcjetpilot, for where they burn books, music, and DVD’s, soon they burn bodies…just ask any holocaust survivor!

Liberty or Death on April 26, 2007 at 8:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2