War, Hell, and a Democratic President
Our soldiers are dying in greater numbers than ever in Afghanistan. So yes, the left sunk so low as to politicize their deaths under Bush, because they sure don't seem to care about their lives now.
November 18, 2010 - 12:00 am
The last time I checked, war was still hell, and American soldiers were still risking their lives at the orders of our commander-in-chief.
But the day a Democrat became president, daily body counts suddenly went MIA, Code Pink protesters went AWOL, and D.C.’s playground politics took over the MSM’s daily propaganda bubble. As if on cue from some hunch-backed news controller for the party, gruesome stories from the front lines disappeared.
The only flurry of war coverage in the past two years occurred when General Stanley McChrystal went to the press himself, and forced his requested Afghan troop surge onto the front pages and the airwaves. Due to the general’s willingness to sacrifice his own career for our country, both the president and his media brigade had to briefly cover the war.
But lickety-split, the forced eruption of war news was once again buried in the back pages as soon as President Obama made his dutiful announcement on a temporary troop surge for Afghanistan and its companion withdrawal timetable. A tiny flurry of commentary followed the president’s decision, with the left upset that the peacemaker-in-chief was actually choosing to escalate the war LBJ-style, and some on the right saying that under the pre-announced timetable paradigm immediate withdrawal made more sense.
As soon as the press could, however, they dropped the war news like a hot potato, obviously not wanting to further alienate the president’s own base and definitely not wanting the nation to know that in the two years since Obama took the helm, war deaths have been the worst in the whole nine years of fighting in Afghanistan. Unmanned drones are still striking targets, and unfortunately still killing civilians in the war-torn country. But one would need to sleuth websites run by military heroes to find out about all this.
So much for a noble, truthful press.
During the midterm election season, the Democratic Congress’ propensity for politicizing our national security went all but unmentioned.
Harry “this war is lost” Reid (D-NV) just won re-election to the U.S. Senate, and reminding voters of his traitorous aid and comfort to our enemies in Iraq barely made a dent in his home-state support. Representative Pete Stark (D-CA), who has the disgraceful distinction of having proclaimed from the floor of our once-august people’s house that Congress was funding a war so that America’s finest “could get their heads blown off for the president’s [Bush's] amusement,” was reelected with an astonishing 71.6% of the vote.
The Democratic Party, whose own elected representatives voted overwhelmingly to authorize President Bush to go to war in both Afghanistan and Iraq, shamelessly politicized our war effort from the moment Nancy and Harry took control of Congress in 2007.