Are the Democrats/liberals cowards?

Published on November 19, 2005 By drmiler In Politics

Well it would seem that they are. House republicans tried to get a vote on Murtha's mouth-off about cutting and running last night. Just a simple up down vote to get a feel for where everyone stood on this. And you know what happened? Yep you got it. The dems made sure that the proposal got shot down. Now "Why" would that be you wonder (at least I do)? Probably because they know they don't have leg to stand on with this. Nobody but the dems/libs would vote to do so. But not one of them had the courage to stand up for their convictions.

Comments (Page 1)

drmiler

on Nov 19, 2005

bump

Dr Guy

on Nov 19, 2005

It has nothing to do with cowardice. It has everything to do with no vision or plan. They are no longer a party, just a crowd of harpies picking at the wounds and offering nothing in return.

Moderateman

on Nov 19, 2005

actually 3 dems voted for immediate withdrawel. I respect these 3 dems for having the courage of their convictions.

bakerstreet

on Nov 19, 2005

Again, you give them more credit than they deserve. They aren't cowards, they are just willing to say anything and sell out anyone for more power. What people don't remember is we are in the rundown to the election. On a presidential election year we'd be abuzz with takes on how this is all posturing. Well, the 2006 elections are coming up, and these guys are in that mode.

Note the vote numbers. This wasn't a "stance" it was a posture, mainly hoping Republicans would come out and call well-picked people cowards, and they did. The Dems don't lose face, because only 3 of them voted to remove troops. The only ones that hurt themselves were all the grandstanding Republicans that played into it.

Anyone who would appreciate Murtha being called a coward would have voted Republican anyway. The people you lose are the important middle. Republicans need to stop falling for this.

ParaTed2k

on Nov 19, 2005

True Bakerstreet, it is unfair and playing politics to paint someone as a coward for one cowardly opinion or act. My apologies to Rep. Murtha.

However, the bacteria in Iraq consider the U.S. to be cowards and are counting on us not having the stomach to put up with continuing the fight. Since the goal of any side of a war is to deny the enemy the ability to continue the fight, then it is an act of cowardice to stand in the way of the side you claim to support.

Rep. Murtha, and many others have some naive notion that if we pulled out of Iraq, so would the bacteria. I have no idea on what they base this opinion... other than they are too scared to see the fight brought to a successful end... which is cowardice.

So Rep. Murtha and those who call for a pullout before success is achieved aren't entirely cowards, just cowardly in this situation and dangerously naive.

bakerstreet

on Nov 19, 2005

Again, I think it's impossible to know if this guy rally wants the troops pulled out at all. yYou are assuming a politician mean what he says. Not a good bet.

Because he KNEW they wouldn't be. He knew the president would veto it, and he knew his own party wouldn't let it pass anyway. So, you have to ask yourself... why? Are his particular voters more in that mind?

I'd be willing to bet it served some purpose. IMHO, it was slight-of-hand. They wanted the attention off everything else for a day or two, and they knew gullible republicans would play into it and call him a coward and set all the pundits on fire. The CIA thing is looking more and more like a sad witchhunt, maybe they wanted people thinking about something else for a day or two.

stevendedalus

on Nov 20, 2005

Only in America: purple heart veterans--provided they are Democrats--are customarily called cowards--just ask John Kerry.

drmiler

on Nov 20, 2005

Only in America: purple heart veterans--provided they are Democrats--are customarily called cowards--just ask John Kerry.

Sorry but as far as I'm concerned Kerry is a traitor! And "that" goes beyond cowardice.

stevendedalus

on Nov 20, 2005

Hook or crook he was there in Vietnam, not Texas or ALabama.

COL Gene

on Nov 20, 2005

Wake up. The latest poll shows 82% of Americans want a deadline for the U.S. to pull out of Iraq. The Bush policy in Iraq is a FAILURE! Every place Bush goes in the U.S. and abroad he has the people demonstrating aginst his policies. We have not had a president that was so unpopular since Nixon (another Republican).

drmiler

on Nov 20, 2005

Hook or crook he was there in Vietnam, not Texas or ALabama.

Just in case you don't realize it....my Kerry/traitor comment has NOTHING to do with his service in Vietnam.

drmiler

on Nov 20, 2005

Wake up. The latest poll shows 82% of Americans want a deadline for the U.S. to pull out of Iraq. The Bush policy in Iraq is a FAILURE! Every place Bush goes in the U.S. and abroad he has the people demonstrating against his policies. We have not had a president that was so unpopular since Nixon (another Republican).

Hey klink, if your going to use polls on my thread I must "insist" on links for the poll. Because as far as I've seen there is NO such poll showing "your" figures. And BTW, YOU'RE one of the FEW that think every policy from Bush is a failure. Also NO ONE here cares about protesters abroad!

stevendedalus

on Nov 21, 2005

Agreed, he betrayed me by not running a forceful, consistent campaign.

Col Could be on to something, since North Carolina--a haven for military bases--are having second thoughts about the war.

drmiler

on Nov 21, 2005

Agreed, he betrayed me by not running a forceful, consistent campaign.

Sorry, but he betrayed America by holding unauthorized talks with the enemy (N Vietnam) in Paris. Btw.... we were "still" at war with them at the time. And "if" the col is on to something, then let him post his source. Other than that he's on to "nothing"!

Slanderer

on Nov 21, 2005

You know this is one time where I actually agree with you.

Unfortunately Murtha should have mouthed off and said his piece back in 03 instead of being after the fact now. It just seems so partisan. He should have had the balls to say his piece when he actually could have done something instead of taking a wait and see approach. I would have never given the reds the benefit of doubt and knew any contemplation of success was impossible given the ill defined mission parameters. He should have taken more of a Robert Byrd approach but for reasons known only to him, chose not to.

So yes they are cowards.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!