And Democrats are calling it a "stunt."
I guess calling on the Representatives in the House to vote on a proposed resolution is more of a stunt than, say, utilizing rarely-used Senate rules to close down the chamber and draw attention to an issue that as long since been beaten to death.
Whatever.
The point in all this is clear: When it comes down to it, the Democrat stance on the war in Iraq is purely political. They bad mouth the war and try to tell us that popular support for the war effort is eroding because their political enemies are, by and large, supporting the war. Yet when asked to take a stance on thie issue one way or the other they overwhelmingly vote in favor of it. Because in the end, for them, it is not about the war itself but staying in office.
Which should tell us something about the words that come out of Democrat mouths every time they talk about the war.
Democrats are now spinning this by saying that Murtha was not calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq but rather a withdrawal at the earliest practicable date, which is the wording used by Murtha in his proposal. This shows just how much of a "stunt" this proposal really was. The President himself wants withdrawal from Iraq at the earliest "practicable" date, but for him the most practicable date is when we have won.
You can read more from Rob Port at SayAnythingBlog.com
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 12
About a year ago 47% polled believed we made a mistake vs. 51% who didn't. Last week, 54% believed we made a mistake vs. 45% who didn't. I'm finding it hard to believe that these polls are part of yet another another Democrat stunt.
As far as the votes that Bush recieved a year ago, I wonder how many of those that supported the war then were still under the misapprehensions, fueled by by Bush and his administration, that Saddam and Iraq had been directly or indirectly involved with the attacks of 9/11 and/or that Iraq posed an imminent threat to our security.
These media groups use lots of different polling companies. Why don't you point me to a specific poll and I'll tell you about the polling practices.
I don't know, but I wonder how many of Bush's critics, counting yourself, are under the misapprehension that Bush made any such connection.
The CNN poll link is in my first comment above.
Regarding the connectionthat Bush and his administration made, a couple of references fromThe Washinton Post:
Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed and Bush Defends Assertions of Iraq-Al Qaeda Relationship. These were from the period when the White House was backing off from these claims but, alas, the damage had been done for many voters.
You're talking about two different things.
Saddam did have connections to al Qaeda. High-ranking al Qaeda members traveled freel in Iraq and regularly received medica care in Baghdad with Saddam's blessing. There were training camps in northern Iraq, etc.
Saddam also had connections so suicide bombings in Israel. His payments to the families of suicide bombers has been public record for years now.
As for the poll, I was looking at the wrong comment for the link. Didn't scroll up far enough.
I went to the Gallup site and tried to look up information on the poll, but they make you pay to log in. I can't find any details as to the methodology anywhere else.
What I can tell you is that these polls routinely over-sample Democrats. The Democrat sample size is consistently in the mid-30's to low 40's as a percentage of the whole. According to nation-wide voter registration Americans self-identify themselves as Democrats at a rate of around 23%, something that is backed up with recent election results. So, oversampling Democrats by 10 or so percent and undersampling Republicans could potentially swing a poll like this 10 - 15%.
That's a whole lot.
But regardless, the President doesn't rule on polls, and that is a good thing. I'll agree with you that support for the war effort is declining, but I'd pin the reason more on the onslaught of disinformation from the media, Democrats and their sycophants (see your own comments above re: the President making a 9/11 connection).
I think we're at a bit of an impasse here. I certainly believe that no poll is perfect and have no doubt that some have the oversampling flaw you cite. Trouble is, there seems no concrete way to fully examine the biases built into any particular poll. Thank goodness that neither informed voters nor responsible, high ranking leaders make their judgements entire based on the results of polls.
As for the Suddam-9/11 connection, I've looked in vain for an article I read some time ago that outlined the statements of the Bush administration and their effect on the public opinion regatding this linkage. Since I can't locate objective data, I think its time to move on.
I hope you have a good Thanksgiving.
Tony
You make fantastic claims which become a reality in your mind. You must have better intelligence than this administration. Have you found the weapons of mass destruction, sales receipts for the purchase of uranium from Niger, or pictures of Osama and Zarqawi sunning in the sands of Iraq? Every claim the Neo Cons have made for the war on Iraq has been exposed as bogus. Now you claim that every survey and poll indicatiing Bush's fall from grace is slanted what is your proof not your claim?
Samuel, if I were you I wouldn't spend too much time accusing others of thinking fantasy is reality.
As for ( the Neo-Con) war one author had this to say,
I have seen men march to the wars, and then I have watched their homeward tread, And they brought back bodies of living men, But their eyes were cold and dead"
> Edmund Vance Cooke