Never miss a post. Subscribe today.


Republicans Have No Shame

Republican Logic 101:

  • Republicans refused to adequately supply the soldiers in the field.
  • Republicans refuse to acknowledge the increasingly futility of leaving our troops in the field when a military solution seems less and less likely
  • Republicans support an Iraqi proposal to grant amnesty insurgents who have killed American troops.

Therefore, liberals don't support American soldiers.

Sound confusing? Not in the world of the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress, where we have esteemed members like Ted Stevens offering the following :

"I really believe we ought to try to find some way to encourage that country to demonstrate to those people who have been opposed to what we're trying to do, that it's worthwhile for them and their children to come forward and support this democracy. And if that's amnesty, I'm for it. I'd be for it. And if those people who are, come Forward… if they bore arms against our people, what's the difference between those
people that bore arms against the Union in the War between the States? What's the difference between the Germans and Japanese and all the people we've forgiven?"

Or patriots like Saxby Chambliss , hero of many deferments :

"Is it not true today that we have Iraqis who are fighting the war against the insurgents, who at one time fought against American troops and other coalition troops as they were marching to Baghdad, who have now come over to our side and are doing one heck of a job of fighting along, side by side, with Americans and coalition forces, attacking and killing insurgents on a daily basis?"

Now this policy, one that I would suggest Republicans would call craven weakness if it came from the Left, might have been a fine idea. That is until the Iraqi aide,Adnan Ali al-Kadhimi, who announced it suddenly resigned after the idea was made public. 

This is all about seizing the rhetoric…and Republicans have managed to frame issue after issue in terms of Democratic weakness against terror. They've castigated critics as hurting the morale of the troops and weakening our resolve. This needs to be a campaign issue for Democrats–especially against smug, draft-dodging, warmongering smear artists like Chambliss.

I'd sure like to have a reporter ask Senator Burns what he thinks about the proposal. 

If you appreciate an independent voice holding Montana politicians accountable and informing voters, and you can throw a few dollars a month our way, we would certainly appreciate it.

About the author

Don Pogreba

Don Pogreba has been writing about Montana politics since 2005 and teaching high school English since 2000. He's a former debate coach, and loyal, if often sad, fan of the San Diego Padres and Portland Timbers. He spends far too many hours of his life working at school and on his small business, Big Sky Debate.
His work has appeared in Politico and Rewire.
In the past few years, travel has become a priority, whether it's a road trip to some little town in Montana or a museum of culture in Ísafjörður, Iceland.


Click here to post a comment

Please enter an e-mail address

  • Yeah, thank heavens. We just see the Republicans vote against the troops before accusing their political opponents of treason before voting against the troops again.

    The rhetoric and the legislative record are both clear with no room for subtlety whatsoever.

Send this to a friend