Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
36,341 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Top Dems Don't Guarantee Full Iraq Pullout
Leading Candidates Refuse To Promise At Debate They Would Have All Troops Out Of Iraq By 2013


(CBS/AP) HANOVER, N.H., Sept. 26, 2007
The leading Democratic White House hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they cannot guarantee to pull all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of the next presidential term in 2013.

"I think it's hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation's first primary state.

"It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting," added Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

"I cannot make that commitment," said former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.

.......“Democratic primary voters may pause when they consider that none of the three top-tier candidates were willing to promise a complete withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of their first term as president,” said CBSNews.com Senior Political Editor Vaughn Ververs.


The far left anti Iraq War Bush Is Satan group's response?

No yelling, screaming, shouting, wailing, moaning, or gnashing of teeth. Zip. Not even any NY Times editorials on what we "MUST" do.
Nothing but some straight forward leftist blog accounts of the debate, strangely missing the usual rantings.

Looks like the Dems attempt to recreate the Vietnam anti-war movement was nothing but a campaign ploy that only the very gullible believed. Now that we're winning in Iraq they've adjusted their tactics. Look for more of the same squirming, twisting and turning as the campaign unfolds as these would-be leaders are led by events on the ground in the War on Terror.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,161 Posts
The writing may be showing up on that big old wall by now.

The last attempt to vote for a bill that would impose time limits on the war failed worse than the same bill did the last time it was voted on, with 3 Democrats crossing over to vote NO at a time when Democrats were hoping to recruit more Republicans.

I don't know how much attention the ramifications of that vote was given on television news, but radio, as usual, made those of us who listen aware of what is going on.

Rush noted last week that even anti-war protests are drawing much smaller crowds now than they did a year or two ago.

Somebody is running out of steam.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
34,484 Posts
I think that the Viet Nam War Protest Party has finally come to the reallization that the "peace, love, incense, crash pads and Hare Krishna" crowd is now middle-aged with 2.4 kids, a dog and a minivan. Hillary et al suddenly find themselves playing to a declining house as it becomes evident that Iraq is not Viet Nam, and the mood of the nation is not what it was in 1969.

They're finally abandoning a ship that sank a couple of decades ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,908 Posts
...Those folks are now what they were then, Sam. Lefties, who are still resentful that the Right broke the Soviets and who dislike most of what we hold dear about America. They will say or do anything to con their way back to power and will turn on a dime and abandon any principle to win. If all of them appear to become more moderate and thoughtful, it's but a ploy in response to a poll. They have NO redeeming value.
 

·
Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member
Joined
·
59,855 Posts
I agree, they are probably regrouping so as to use a different approach.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
34,484 Posts
We're on the same page, Davey. Their abandonment of the "Up the Establishment" line is strictly a strategic move calculated to make them appear more "mainstream". A hyena don't change his spots - the Lefties are ditching something that obviously isn't getting them any flowers in the interest of finding something else that will.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top