PDA

View Full Version : Clyburn: Positive Report by Petraeus Could Split House Democrats on War


BoogyMan
08-01-2007, 02:09 AM
Nope, not cheerleading failure here folks, nothing to see, move along.


Source Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/30/AR2007073001380_pf.html

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party's efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.

Clyburn, in an interview with the washingtonpost.com video program PostTalk, said Democrats might be wise to wait for the Petraeus report, scheduled to be delivered in September, before charting next steps in their year-long struggle with President Bush over the direction of U.S. strategy.

Clyburn noted that Petraeus carries significant weight among the 47 members of the Blue Dog caucus in the House, a group of moderate to conservative Democrats. Without their support, he said, Democratic leaders would find it virtually impossible to pass legislation setting a timetable for withdrawal.

"I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us," Clyburn said. "We, by and large, would be wise to wait on the report."

Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be "a real big problem for us."

Clyburn's comments came as House and Senate Democrats try to figure out their next steps in the legislative battle. Clyburn said he could foresee a circumstance in which House Democrats approve a measure without a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces, which has been the consistent goal of the party throughout the months-long debate. But he said he could just as easily see Democrats continue to include a timetable.

Clyburn also address the reasons behind declining approval ratings for Congress, which spiked earlier in the year when Democrats took over the House and Senate. The most recent Washington Post-ABC News poll showed just 37 percent approving of the performance of Congress.

"Remember right after the election it went very high on approval,?" he said. "Then all of a sudden people saw that we were not yielding the kind of result that they wanted to yield."

He said most Americans still do not know some of the domestic legislation that has been approved. Fewer understand that, despite Democratic majorities in both houses, that it takes 60 votes to pass anything legislation in the Senate.

Clyburn noted that while overall approval ratings of Congress are low, people still rate Democrats higher than Republicans. "People feel good about the Democratic Party, they just don't feel real good about the Congress itself."

lily
08-01-2007, 02:38 AM
Nope, not cheerleading failure here folks, nothing to see, move along.

You've lost me. Last month you were saying wait for Petraeus report and now it's a bad thing to wait?

The Democrats were elected to end the war. So are you suggesting they would be upset if Petraeus came back in September and said the war is over?

BoogyMan
08-01-2007, 02:42 AM
Nope, not cheerleading failure here folks, nothing to see, move along.

You've lost me. Last month you were saying wait for Petraeus report and now it's a bad thing to wait?

The Democrats were elected to end the war. So are you suggesting they would be upset if Petraeus came back in September and said the war is over?


I AM waiting for the report lily.

Pointing out that a majority whip called the possibility of a positive report, if that comes, a "big problem" is indicative of the level to which the situation has been politicized. Nothing about my commentary in this regard could even remotely be construed as saying it is a bad thing to wait.

If Petraeus came back and said the war is over that would be great, but that isn't likely to happen and all of the fuss and misdirection being thrown up is just obfuscation of the fact that a democratic whip called a possible positive report "a big problem."

lily
08-01-2007, 02:45 AM
Pointing out that a majority whip called the possibility of a positive report, if that comes, a "big problem" is indicative of the level to which the situation has been politicized.

"I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us," Clyburn said. "We, by and large, would be wise to wait on the report."


You've still lost me. The Democrats have been working to get Republicans on board to put an end to this war.

BoogyMan
08-01-2007, 02:53 AM
It is pretty plain lily, a positive report would not fit the rhetoric of the ruling party.

lily
08-01-2007, 03:09 AM
If you say so.

BoogyMan
08-01-2007, 03:24 AM
If you say so.


I was waiting for that.

Drocket
08-01-2007, 04:50 AM
I'm not going to be terribly surprised if Petraeus's report is positive. Lets be entirely blunt: if he comes back with a negative report, he WILL be "retiring to spend more time with his family", just like everyone else who's held his position and said that Iraq was turning into a quagmire. We all know this. It's been demonstrated too many times for it to be in doubt. He'll then be replaced with a brand new yes man, one as yet untainted by the guilt of sending men to their deaths to avoid a humiliating defeat for Bush, which will be followed by a demand to give the new guy 6 months. You know, to prove himself. We wouldn't want to besmirch his honor by saying he was just hired solely because he's willing to say what Bush wants to hear, after all. It's just that we should listen to the generals. No, no, not the dozens of former generals who say we've lost Iraq - just this one particular general. For now, until HE gets replaced too.

BoogyMan
08-01-2007, 05:00 AM
Well Drocket, thanks for providing the view through the conspiracy goggles.

Now, how about addressing the democratic whip coming out and saying that a positive report would be a "big problem."

Drocket
08-01-2007, 05:07 AM
Well Drocket, thanks for providing the view through the conspiracy goggles.
It's the truth and you know it. The Bush administration has fired one general after another for daring to tell the truth about Iraq, and Petraeus would be no different. He knows perfectly well that his career hinges on making the report as positive as possible.

Now, how about addressing the democratic whip coming out and saying that a positive report would be a "big problem."
Because sadly, there's a lot of Democrats who are chicken shit cowards who will hide behind any fig leaf they can find rather than risk their career to do the right thing.

BoogyMan
08-01-2007, 05:20 AM
Well Drocket, thanks for providing the view through the conspiracy goggles.
It's the truth and you know it. The Bush administration has fired one general after another for daring to tell the truth about Iraq, and Petraeus would be no different. He knows perfectly well that his career hinges on making the report as positive as possible.

So says the radical left anyway. I posted a good definition of the strawman fallacy in another thread, you might read it.


Now, how about addressing the democratic whip coming out and saying that a positive report would be a "big problem."
Because sadly, there's a lot of Democrats who are chicken shit cowards who will hide behind any fig leaf they can find rather than risk their career to do the right thing.


Umm Sure D, sure.

lily
08-01-2007, 11:11 PM
[quote=BoogyMan]


So says the radical left anyway.
Shinseki on down to Casey.

BoogyMan
08-01-2007, 11:43 PM
I have not seen anything other than commentary by those not in a position to know those men were fired for their opinions lily.

lily
08-03-2007, 01:31 AM
Well, let's see.........they gave their military opinion. It did not match up to what this administration wanted to hear. They are out of jobs months later.

BoogyMan
08-03-2007, 01:39 AM
Well, let's see.........they gave their military opinion. It did not match up to what this administration wanted to hear. They are out of jobs months later.


You can speculate all you wish lily, but that doesn't make it fact.

lily
08-03-2007, 02:54 AM
You can speculate all you wish lily, but that doesn't make it fact.


No, it's just a hell of a coincidnce.:rolleyes:

BoogyMan
08-03-2007, 03:16 AM
You can speculate all you wish lily, but that doesn't make it fact.


No, it's just a hell of a coincidnce.:rolleyes:


2 + 2 only equals 5 for extremely large values of 2 lily.

That is the kind of unprovable assertion based politics that are employed with the assertions about Petraeus, and it is still a diversionary tactic to take the focus away from the democrats seeing a positive report as a big problem.

lily
08-03-2007, 03:34 AM
2 + 2 only equals 5 for extremely large values of 2 lily.

Boogy......if it was only one that was replaced you'd have a point, but it's not.

That is the kind of unprovable assertion based politics that are employed with the assertions about Petraeus, and it is still a diversionary tactic to take the focus away from the democrats seeing a positive report as a big problem.


This fantasy that you have of the Democrats wanting to lose this war for political gain borders on insane hatred. I gave you my opinion on his statement........take it or leave it.

BoogyMan
08-03-2007, 03:45 AM
I didn't make the comment up lily, House Majority Whip James Clyburn actually made the comment and it is pretty revealing. He claimed a positive report would be "a real big problem for us."

His comment speaks volumes as to the political nature of the discourse on Iraq.

lily
08-03-2007, 04:01 AM
I didn't make the comment up lily, House Majority Whip James Clyburn actually made the comment and it is pretty revealing. He claimed a positive report would be "a real big problem for us."




I didn't say you made up the statement I said your interpretation of it was wrong. You chose to take one sentence out of a statement and make it into what you wanted it to say.

His comment speaks volumes as to the political nature of the discourse on Iraq.

..........and what is that........that the Democrats want to end this war, or that the Democrats want to win this war, just to make Bush look bad?

BoogyMan
08-03-2007, 04:05 AM
This is not a complex argument lily, and the statement has been left completely in context. The guy flat out stated that a positive report would be a big problem for the democrats. The democrats whole platform is 'get out of Iraq and do it now,' and any positive progress is seen as a hindrance to that agenda.

lily
08-03-2007, 04:10 AM
This is not a complex argument lily, and the statement has been left completely in context. The guy flat out stated that a positive report would be a big problem for the democrats. The democrats whole platform is 'get out of Iraq and do it now,' and any positive progress is seen as a hindrance to that agenda.


I already addressed this in post #4.

BoogyMan
08-03-2007, 01:00 PM
This is not a complex argument lily, and the statement has been left completely in context. The guy flat out stated that a positive report would be a big problem for the democrats. The democrats whole platform is 'get out of Iraq and do it now,' and any positive progress is seen as a hindrance to that agenda.


I already addressed this in post #4.


Sorry Lily, all you did there was try to excuse your party for showing it's hind quarters. I would imagine Clyburn isn't a very popular person with the democratic leadership right now.