House Not-So-Divided, After All?

House Not-So-Divided, After All?
Vol: 50 Issue: 19 Saturday, November 19, 2005

If it weren’t literally a matter of life and death, it would be amusing. It literally came to a head when Pennsylvania Democrat John Murtha took to the floor of the House and told lawmakers (and the world) that US forces have done ‘all that they could do’ in the war against the Iraq insurgency and that it is time to withdraw the troops immediately.

According to Murtha, US troops are the ‘prime target’ of the insurgency. He told lawmakers that he believed military officials when he visited Kuwait just before the war and they showed him where American forces would be attacked by weapons of mass destruction when they approach Baghdad.

By mid-summer, Murtha said administration officials were “not honest in their assessment” that they were winning the ongoing battle.

But now, with no end to the killing in sight, he said, “The US cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It’s time to bring the troops home. . . They have become the enemy.”

Murtha was the perfect choice to be the spokesman for the Surrender Now Movement of the Democratic Left. He is a bona fide war hero who earned two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star in combat in Vietnam. Every Democratic defense of Murtha’s comments begins with a reference to Murtha’s military service, followed by a reminder Bush didn’t serve in combat and Cheney didn’t serve in the military at all.

Murtha’s military service is cited so often and his defenders are so shrill that it evidently escapes everybody’s attention that the discussion was really about which Democratic politician was best qualified to advocate surrender.

This would be a good place to note that America has a Pentagon FULL of military veterans, including lots and lots and lots of war heroes — none of whom share Murtha’s military assessment of the battlefield situation.

The absurdity of watching reporters skeptically grilling four-star generals, chests all but obscured by rows of medals, and then fawning over the tactical assessment advanced by a 73 year-old veteran of a forty-year-old war would, as I noted, be funny, if it weren’t so serious.

That isn’t to take anything away from Rep. Murtha or to denigrate in any way his military service to America. But the jungles of Vietnam bear as much resemblance to the Iraqi desert as, ummm. . . well, the jungles of Vietnam to the Iraqi desert.

And Murtha’s military assessment, which is that America is losing, is in direct contrast to the assessment of professional military minds at the Pentagon. Not to mention being wholly at odds with the military assessment of the commanders in the field.

In any case, anyone who dared to call Murtha’s proposal what it was, was immediately beaten about the head and shoulders with Murtha’s military record. How dare anyone question the wisdom of such a great patriot, etc.,etc.

Murtha became the instant darling of the liberal media.

The Boston Globe ran an editorial under the headline “White House Plays Chicken with a War Hero.” CNN styled its coverage to fit its headline; “A Hawk Rattles GOP Cage.”

The Washington Post called the White House’s reaction to Murtha’s call for a US surrender “Trash Talk” and called the administration’s incredulous reaction in which Scott MeClellan expressed bafflement that Murtha “is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party” a ‘smear tactic’.

(This one is one of my very favorite examples of spinning something until everybody is too dizzy to stand up, let alone think. If being part of the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party is a ‘smear’, what does that say about Howard Dean? And I thought they LIKED Michael Moore. They invited him to speak at their convention)

The story played well abroad, too. China’s ‘People’s Daily Online’ headlined its story, “Top Democrat Calls for US Troop Withdrawal.” The Globe and Mail informed its Canadian readers that “Pressure Rises for Bush to Quit Iraq.”

The Australian stood apart from the foreign press, noting that “the biggest weapon in the arsenal of the US’s critics is carefully selective amnesia. Conveniently forgetting important historical facts enables tactical amnesiacs to make claims about US policy that seem to support their contention that the country’s Government is uniquely evil.”

There you have it. Liberal ‘patriotism’ as defined from abroad; “their contention that the country’s government is uniquely evil.” Think the implications through carefully.

There are few countries in the world more friendly to the United States than Australia. This friendship is not a friendship between Australia and the Bush administration — it is a friendship between two peoples.

Now look at how liberal ‘patriotism’ plays among America’s friends — tactical amnesiacs selectively cherry picking events for the purpose of portraying their own government to the rest of the world as ‘uniquely evil’.

We are in the midst of a world war against a determined enemy dedicated to our destruction. And it is obvious, even from the other side of the world, that the enemy’s most effective tactical weapon against the United States is liberal ‘patriotism’.


The liberal left portrays their anti-war stance as one of ‘principled opposition to a failed policy’ and denies any suggestion that it is really a cynical effort to use the war (and the troops engaged in it) for political gain. Yesterday, they were given the opportunity to display the courage of their convictions and put those charges to rest.

They were given the chance to express those convictions when a resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of US forces from Iraq was put before them for a vote. Each member could express his true convictions, stand by their votes and let the chips fall where they may.

The proposed resolution was simple and to the point, and left little room for selective interpretation: “It is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.”

The Democrats were horrified at what they labeled a ‘political stunt’. “It’s just heinous,” said Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif. “A disgrace,” declared House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “The rankest of politics and the absence of any sense of shame,” added Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 House Democrat.

But when it came to putting their convictions on the line, only three voted in favor of withdrawal, Cynthia McKinney [D-Ga] Robert Wexler, [D- Fla] and Jose Serrano [D-NY]. It was ultimately defeated by a margin of 403-3.

What is disgraceful about forcing politicians to demonstrate the courage of their expressed convictions? How does insisting on a democratic vote in the Congress qualify as the ‘rankest of politics’?

“Whoever thought up this pipe dream should be ashamed of themselves. It brings incredible shame to this House,” said Rep. David R. Obey, Wisconsin Democrat.

What is so shameful about forcing politicians to record their true positions on the war? The ‘shame’ was when the vote exposed the antiwarriors as frauds caught in the act of using the war (and America’s warriors) as cannon fodder in a political battle.

The hypocrisy makes one’s head spin.

Rep. Jack Kingston, the George Republican whose district includes the home base of the Army’s 3rd Infantry, summed up the GOP’s ‘heinous tactics’ this way: “We’ll put it to a vote, see if Democrats really want immediate withdrawal,” before observing what the vote count made obvious.

“Their hate for George Bush is so great they don’t seem to care about the ramifications of reckless statements.”

Even if it hurts America abroad, increases the risks to US troops, aids the enemy in its effort to recruit new jihadists to fight the Great Satan and holds up America’s much-vaunted political system for global ridicule.

George Bush is the real enemy. If, in defeating him, it means defeating America, so be it.

According to the outline of Bible prophecy, during the Tribulation, the world will divide up into four main spheres of influence relative to Israel’s geographic location. To the north, the Gog-Magog Alliance. To Israel’s west is the revived Roman Empire of antichrist. The kings of the east and the kings of the south cover the rest of the compass points.

There is no mention of a fifth superpower resembling the United States.

“They would none of My counsel: they despised all My reproof. Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices. For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them. But whoso hearkeneth unto Me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.” (Proverbs 1:30-33)

This entry was posted in Briefings by Pete Garcia. Bookmark the permalink.

About Pete Garcia

Christian, father, husband, veteran, pilot, and sinner saved by grace. I am a firm believer in, and follower of Jesus Christ. I am Pre-Trib, Dispensational, and Non-Denominational (but I lean Southern Baptist).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s