More Democrat Demagoguery
20 September 2006It seems Dems never miss a chance for political gain by mis-characterizing what a Republican said. In the latest case the Republican was Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss. What he’s being castigated for was a remark he made in a closed door session of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the topic was intelligence in the war on terror.
There is dispute over what the Senator said. Dems claim he said “We need better intelligence. If we had better intelligence in the Civil War we’d be quoting Jefferson Davis, not Lincoln.” The Senator’s office say he said “If Gen. Jeb Stuart had had better intelligence, we’d all be meeting in Richmond right now.” Whatever! The general sentiment is the same, that the outcome of the Civil War would have been different if the south had better intelligence. Whether that is a true statement is debatable but the sentiment is a sound one, namely, that intelligence can make or break a war.
Rather than observe the obvious point, that Chambliss was lobbying for better intelligence in this war, Dems chose the obtuse route. They prefer to accuse Chambliss of political insensitivity, as if he’d said he wished the south had won. What nonsense! The same statement could be made about most every entity that has ever lost a war. You could say that if the Nazis had better intelligence we’d all be speaking German today. Would that be politically insensitive? How about if the Soviets had better intelligence we’d be meeting in Leningrad?
It is tempting to call this political correctness run amok but this is more insidious than that. This is pure demagoguery, nothing less. Dems know exactly what Chambliss was saying and what he meant. There was no secret desire to return to slavery or hidden wish that the south had won the Civil War. The statement, which ever statement you choose, means exactly what it says, that is, that we could lose the war without good intelligence.
Dems have taken this route before. When Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina retired, then Senate Majority Leader, Trent Lott attempted to complement him. In doing so he said, “I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over all these years, either,” Admittedly Lott could have chosen his words better. Still, everyone knew that Lott was simply trying be gracious to a retiring member of the Senate from his own party. But Dems saw an opportunity to attack and it didn’t matter whether the charge was substantive or not.
The Democrats have demonstrated a pattern of spurious attacks purely for partisan gain rather than principled opposition. The Dems again demonstrate that power is what matters, not principle.
Print This Post
Tags: Ethics, Free Speech, Idiots, PoliticsRelated Posts
- A Demagogue by Any Other Name
- Democrat Unity
- Talking Points on the Right
- The Measure of a Man II: Democrat Defense
- Cheaper Gas?
September 21st, 2006 at 6:24 am
They took him to task when he ran against Max Cleland, too. He was accused of questioning Cleland’s patriotism. Why? Because he dared to criticise a veteran – a disabled veteran – over said veteran’s actions and votes as a U.S.Senator. We know, now, that the Democrats hold certain classes of people sacred and inviolate when it comes to criticism. Leftist mothers of fallen soldiers may not be criticised, no matter how outrageous their comments, for instance.
Nothing new, sadly. Just evidence that the Democratic Party in the U.S. is lost in the wasteland of rage and political correctness
September 21st, 2006 at 9:01 am
Yes, that’s what Ann Coulter was talking about in her book Godless. She was castigated for calling the Jersey girls the witches of Eastwick, among other things, but she was exactly right.