The Nation: Long Debate Better Than Blindly Following Bush

Stop That Talk About Division On Iraq
The Nation: Long Debate Better Than Blindly Following Bush

June 25, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It's better to spend time debating Iraq than it is to blindly follow President Bush, according to The Nation. (AP / CBS)


Quote

I'd prefer a party that openly struggles to find the right policy over one that blindly follows the President over a cliff.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


(The Nation) This column was written by Ari Berman.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an author of numerous articles about Democratic division on Iraq, I have a confession to make. My ears and eyes can only take so much.

Over and over for the past two weeks, as the House and Senate debated the war, we've heard that "Democrats are divided."

So what?

Obviously it would be better politically and substantively if Democrats could unite behind one policy — and that policy specified that we should leave, preferably within a year. But I'd prefer a party that openly struggles to find the right policy over one that blindly follows the President over a cliff.

Take one example: Senator Rick Santorum. In August, Senate challenger Bob Casey accused Santorum of failing to ask "tough questions" about the war. Santorum responded that he had raised concerns, "public and privately." When asked to find an example, Santorum's office admitted "that it cannot locate public statements of the senator questioning the Iraq war." Now Santorum is saying we found WMD's in Iraq!

Such situations are all-too frequent. Only three Republicans in the House voted against their party's rigged resolution expressing the sense that "it is not in the national security interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq."


snip


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/23/opinion/main1747865.shtml

From the article

snip

"So maybe the story should be why so many Republicans continue to mindlessly follow this President and his never-ending war?"

That is an excellent observation. "Staying the course" is pointless, mindless, and wrong. Why are the Republicans willing to sacrifice so many lives, and so many of the tax dollars that could be used to help so many here at home? That's not patriotism, that's stupidity. 

Hey that's a good one! I think I'll start using that in my tag line.
Eisenhower was peacenik, a Republican, who was outspoken against the "Military industrial complex".
Amen to the Nation.