Happened to catch Chris Matthews tonight still riding his high horse, "Tirade", about the democrats and demanding to know how they will end the war in iraq. If only Chris and others in the talking head trade had been that vociferous before our preemptive strike, our blitzkrieg against iraq by demanding to know the genesis of shock and awe and demanding to know why Hans Blix was ignored or why the U.N Charter was violated perhaps we would not have been having this discussion now. Instead Matthews was busily gushing over the liars who packaged this crime in iraq.
Matthews' position is based on the presumption that the democrats ran on the promise of ending the war in iraq and the public voted for them precisely for that reason above all others. The implication by Matthews is that now that the democrats are in office it appears to him that they are breaking that promise. It's politics as usual.
Indeed Matthews is being quite disingenuous here because those that voted Democrat were primarily voting "against" Republicans for the Democrats never did present a united plan for addressing the crisis in iraq; nor did they individually run on a vote for me because I'll end the war in iraq platform. Matthews is not only demanding that the Democrats do what they never promised as a party, he's creating the myth that such promises were made.
In the process of attempting to absolve himself from a failed foreign policy which he never previously challenged he demands the democrats end the chaos in two years took republicans and acquiescing democrats six years to create. The logic becomes more fractured when Matthews's claims or else the democrats won't win in 08 begging the question who will win? The same republicans that created the crisis?
Let's play hardball Chris - given the current reality in iraq one in which ninety percent of the people claim that life was better under a man that was just executed for war crimes why not ask the hardball questions now: was the intelligence faulty if so then who is responsible for such incompetence, was the intelligence cherry picked if so then who is responsible for such deadly deceit, and how should we hold this administration accountable?
Matthews' position is based on the presumption that the democrats ran on the promise of ending the war in iraq and the public voted for them precisely for that reason above all others. The implication by Matthews is that now that the democrats are in office it appears to him that they are breaking that promise. It's politics as usual.
Indeed Matthews is being quite disingenuous here because those that voted Democrat were primarily voting "against" Republicans for the Democrats never did present a united plan for addressing the crisis in iraq; nor did they individually run on a vote for me because I'll end the war in iraq platform. Matthews is not only demanding that the Democrats do what they never promised as a party, he's creating the myth that such promises were made.
In the process of attempting to absolve himself from a failed foreign policy which he never previously challenged he demands the democrats end the chaos in two years took republicans and acquiescing democrats six years to create. The logic becomes more fractured when Matthews's claims or else the democrats won't win in 08 begging the question who will win? The same republicans that created the crisis?
Let's play hardball Chris - given the current reality in iraq one in which ninety percent of the people claim that life was better under a man that was just executed for war crimes why not ask the hardball questions now: was the intelligence faulty if so then who is responsible for such incompetence, was the intelligence cherry picked if so then who is responsible for such deadly deceit, and how should we hold this administration accountable?
