Blue Crab Boulevard

218

Almost 2,500 years ago at Thermopylae, 300 Spartans and some 700 of their allies, the Thespians, stood fast long enough to give the rest of Greece the time it needed to defeat a Persian invasion. Their heroic stand has come down through history as the very ideal of devotion and heroism.

Fast forward to today when 218 members (216 Democrats and 2 Republicans) of the United States House of Representatives voted to hand victory to the enemies of this nation. Make no mistake about that. They voted to lose a war. They voted for American defeat. Their vote today has no chance of becoming law, a fact they were absolutely assured of before they even counted the votes. They also set a precedent that will - with absolute certainty - come back to haunt a Democrat who holds the office of the President someday in the future.

They make movies about the 300. The 218 will not be similarly remembered.

UPDATE: Others: The Crimson Blog, The American Pundit, 7.62mm Justice, Mary Katharine Ham, Riehl World View, JammieWearingFool, Ace of Spades, The Mighty Righty, The LLama Butchers, Hot Air has the video of Bush slamming this bill for what it is: betrayal of the troops, Gateway Pundit has a partial list of the gigantic, glistening, gobbets of pork that were included in this bill to buy enough votes to get it through.

Politics, War | Gaius March 23, 2007

By Former Republican, March 23, 2007 @ 5:21 pm

Do you really think that Pelosi et al. intentionally want “to hand victory to the enemies of this nation”? Be very careful about saying or implying that people you disagree with are traitors. That kind of rhetoric gets people angry and divides the country. A divided country is weaker. Surely you don’t want that.

If you really think they are traitors, okay, you are entitled to your opinion. If not, don’t use that kind of poisonous rhetoric. Say what you actually mean — that they are stupid or whatever. Demonizing them is not only wrong, it renders you incapable of thinking clearly about what them.
By Gaius, March 23, 2007 @ 5:24 pm

I think they have put politics above the good of the country. You’ve been reading here long enough to know that I do not use that terminology lightly.
By Donna, March 23, 2007 @ 6:29 pm

Gaius says he thinks ‘they’ [referring to Dems in Congress] have put politics above the good of the country. I guess the majority of the citizens of America who want our soldiers out of Iraq, and that same majority who also want a timetable for withdrawal are ‘putting politics above the good of the country’. When I follow this logic to its conclusion…… it seems to not only denigrate a majority of American citizens, it also appears to denigrate democracy. Have I missed something here?
By syn, March 23, 2007 @ 6:53 pm

‘Poisonous rhetoric’… ‘dividing the country’

… that rich coming from a supporter of the anti-war movement which is NOT the majority.

Donna
IF you believe the majority of Americans want to lose why then doesn’t the House majority vote to cut off funding?

Further, why are you not questioning Pelosi’s pork spinach bribery to even get the votes needed?

Is defending obvious corruption for the sake of petty bushhate not denigrating the American people, Democracy?
By Donna, March 23, 2007 @ 7:40 pm

Syn, your assumptions comprise your whole comment.. in the following ways; 1] you assume I am part of an anti-war group; 2] you assume I believe a majority of Americans ‘want to lose’; 3] you assume the made-up category of ‘wanting to lose’ is to be followed by voting to cut off funds; 4] you assume I must question pork if I discuss the logic of Gaius’ statement; 5] you assume I am defending corruption; 6] you assume what I said was for the sake of ‘petty bushhate’; and lastly, your corrollary assumption to #6 is that I am therefore denigrating the American people and democracy.

Well, sorry, Syn, but I’m led to assume that you cannot handle logic, so you cover that inadequacy and incapacity with poisonous rhetoric which must do something for your ego, but which separates you from the majority of Americans. I have not commented on this site for a long time, though I often read and enjoy Gaius’ posts. With the way I just got interpreted and attacked, I am reminded of why I stopped posting comments here.
By Gaius, March 23, 2007 @ 7:50 pm

Very thin ice you are on, Donna. You are attacking the person and slinging much more venom than anyone else right now. When the majority supported the war outright and the minority anti-war people kept up the attacks and the misinformation and the pressure, they were patriots? When one recent poll shows a reversal suddenly war supporters are anti-democratic?

Nice try to have it both ways. Very nice. Knock it off. You’re usually a lot better than this hogwash.
By syn, March 24, 2007 @ 5:15 am

Donna

I haven’t assumed or concluded anything about you personally which is why I ask those questions however, after your response I know all I need to know.

Thanks.
By syn, March 24, 2007 @ 5:27 am

Personally, I find it despicable how the House majority has tacked on spinach pork in order to bribe votes against supporting the war, especially after the American voters just a few months ago believed they were voting into the House majority politicians who were ‘anti-corruption’; this sweet irony in this case leaves a rancid, foul taste in my mouth.

The Democrat Party leadership’s message, ‘we will deliver to the anti-war left what they want even if we have to bribe to get it done’.

What strength of leadership! They need to bribe their own just to show the anti-war crowd they don’t support the war. Did Pelosi get tired of CodePink stalking her or what.
By Chris, March 24, 2007 @ 5:59 am

I started to type up a comment last night, offering some alternatives to traitor, such as short-sighted, myopic, callous, etc. I got stuck, though, and didn’t finish. The word I was looking for was cynical. This whole effort reeks of lack of principles. It has been reduced to grandstanding of the basest sort.

If the Democratic majority feels they represent the majority of Americans, then they should defund the war and thus end it. If those representatives who feel that their constituents want an immediate withdrawal want to represent them, then they should settle for nothing less. Time and time again, the issue of the Iraq war, which I would think we could all agree is a critical and momentous one, has been trivialized by those who are for and against it, but far more often by those who claim to oppose it, but are afraid to take responsibility for that opposition.

This lack of seriousness in our purported leaders makes me queasy.
By Bill Franklin, March 25, 2007 @ 5:19 am

> â€¦ that rich coming from a supporter of the anti-war movement which is NOT the majority.

56% of Americans want the US out of Iraq even if order isn’t restored. 67% of Americans disapprove (55% strongly) with how the war is being handled.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2905762&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

> I find it despicable how the House majority has tacked on spinach pork

Those earmarks leave a bad taste in my mouth too. What percentage did earmarks decrease since Republicans took control? What? A five fold *increase* since 2000 you say? Do we have the pot calling the kettle black?

It hardly seems patriotic to leave US soldiers in a country where 78% of them disapprove of our presence: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/19_03_07_iraqpollnew.pdf