Thus many
on the left who make up the base of the Democratic party have
gone to great lengths to say they support the use of U.S. military
force under appropriate circumstances (like, say, Afghanistan)
and that their objections are confined to this president and the
war in Iraq.
But if you
take some of the arguments this group (which spans the "netroots"
crowd at Daily Kos all the way to the New York Times op-ed page)
has marshalled against President Bush and recast them in generic
terms, you'll see they read like a list of "out clauses"
tucked inside a "We Support the Use of U.S. Military Force"
contract:
The
Chickenhawk Clause: No administration official may
be involved in planning or supporting a war effort unless they
have served in the military. (This clause applies to members
of the public as well).
The
Shared Sacrifice Clause: Wars may not be conducted
unless a vast majority of the public share in some sort of common
sacrifice
which will most likely take the form of increasing the tax burden
on the public.
The
Elite Sacrifice Clause: Wars may not be conducted unless
1) all military age children among the highest ranking civilian
and military officials in the country are forced to serve and
2) a certain (but as yet undefined) percentage of combat deaths
must come from soldiers with "privileged"
backgrounds.
The
Grieving Parent Clause: Mothers and fathers of soldiers
killed in action are given "absolute"
moral authority. Therefore wars may be fought only until the
mother or father of a soldier killed in action objects to either
the policy or the leadership of the administration.
The
Presidential Vacation Clause: During the course of
any conflict where U.S. soldiers are in harm's way, presidents
are not allowed to take vacation but instead must remain at
the White House "burning
the midnight oil" to demonstrate military personnel
are a priority.
The
War Profiteering Clause: The Pentagon is allowed to
hire private contractors to assist in military logistics and
reconstruction projects provided that 1) no member of the administration
has ever had any contact with the company and 2) the company
is not allowed to make a profit.
Of course,
one of the primary requirements for the left to support U.S. military
force is winning the approval of the UN Security Council. Taken
together these requirements would seem to make it almost impossible
for the left to support U.S. military action under any circumstance.
Or will all these rules not apply when Hillary or some other Democrat
is sitting in the White House? - T. Bevan 9:45 am Link
| Email | Send
To A Friend
Wednesday
August 17, 2005
NEWS & NOTES: Governor Bob Taft (R-OH) is
going to be charged with four criminal misdemeanors for "failing
to disclose golf outings and possibly other favors." You
can follow the trials and tribulations of Ohio politics through
the new Right
Angle Blog.
We've launched
election pages for the 2005 Virginia
and New Jersey governor's
races complete with candidate info, links to local media, round-ups
of the latest news stories and, of course, all the latest polls.
Analysis on both races coming shortly. We'll also be launching
a page for the New York City mayoral race in the coming days so
stay tuned.
President
Bush's approval ratings have dropped rather significantly
in the last few days (much to the delight of those on the left,
I'm sure). Our RCP Index on Bush's JA now stands at a paltry 42.8%,
with 53% disapproving of the job he's doing as president. Gas
prices continue to remain high during peak summer travel time
and the drumbeat of negative press on Iraq goes on unabated, but
clearly the other factor added to the mix in the last week has
been the massive media exposure devoted to Cindy Sheehan.
Bush's numbers
will probably rebound in September as Congress returns and the
Roberts nomination hearings dominate the headlines, but for the
rest of the month Bush is trapped in Crawford and the press has
nothing better to do than to keep chronicling the ridiculous circus
going on outside his door. - T. Bevan 4:15 pm Link
| Email | Send
To A Friend
