« live from iraq, it's the day of the bloggers | Main | fair and balanced »

no buts

Jonathan, who unfortunately stopped blogging, poses a very interesting thought, something that has been on my mind all morning.

Wouldn't it be better for a Dem candidate to embrace the capture of Saddam and congratulate the Iraqi people and the coalition forces without making caveats?

Jon says:

If a single democrat put up on their website "Congratulations to our troops on the capture of Saddam Hussein" I would throw my full support behind that candidate. Unless it was Kucinich, he's a creepy dude.

It wouldn't be a support of Bush, it would be a support of our troops and an understanding that Iraq was important, and Hussein evil.

Just a simple "Congratulations" with no attendant Buts.

No "but this doesn't mean the mission is over"
No "but this doesn't vindicate the invasion"
No "but where are the weapons of mass destruction."
None of that. Just congratulations.

And then I would marshall whatever I could to help that candidate. And I bet a good number of warbloggers would, because it would show that whichever candidate it was is serious about foreign policy and the middle east mess, while having different social policies than Bush.

Won't happen, of course, because Democrats are stuck in the "Beat Bush" mentality instead of the "How should we run the United States" mentality. But still. It should.

Update: Jonathan is a man of his word.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference no buts:

» Clark for President and Saddam Captured from Swerdloff's Personal Life
Wherein I briefly come out of hiatus, long enough to endorse Wesley Clark. [Read More]

» Saddam captured (without political commentary) from WHUZZUP!
This is a good thing. I choose to side skip all of the disgusting additional commentary I'm hearing on all sides of the debate (for now), and offer my congratulations to the brave men and women of the armed... [Read More]

» Edwards for president from Swerdloff's Personal Life
Faithful readers will remember that back in December I endorsed Clark.

I am rescinding that endorsement.

I was just spammed by the Clark campaign. I will not vote for a presidential candidate who spams me. I know it is spam because A... [Read More]

Comments

Lieberman's statement is pretty close to unequivocal. There are a few qualifiers thrown in at the end about where we go from here, but I was impressed with it overall.

Clark did. http://clark04.com/press/release/127/

Wow. Clark's my man. Shocking to me, but damn fine statement, General Clark.

"And then I would marshall whatever I could to help that candidate. And I bet a good number of warbloggers would, because it would show that whichever candidate it was is serious about foreign policy and the middle east mess, while having different social policies than Bush."

General Clark looks forward to your continued support.

And he'll get it.

Excuse me, but if you look at Dean's site and not at the rabble in the blog comments, that's exactly what his statement says, too.

Statement by Governor Dean on the Capture of Saddam Hussein

Dec. 14, 2004, WEST PALM BEACH-- Governor Dean issued the following statement this morning:

"This is a great day for the Iraqi people, the US, and the international community.

"Our troops are to be congratulated on carrying out this mission with the skill and dedication we have come to know of them.

"This development provides an enormous opportunity to set a new course and take the American label off the war. We must do everything possible to bring the UN, NATO, and other members of the international community back into this effort.

"Now that the dictator is captured, we must also accelerate the transition from occupation to full Iraqi sovereignty."

Dean tried to sound gracious, but there was still the sense that he was congratulating his enemy, rather than he himself being glad that we got Saddam.

With Clark, there's no doubt that he's genuinely supportive of our troops in Iraq and this major victory they achieved in capturing Saddam Hussein.

Sorry folks, but my memory is a lot longer than that.

We would have never gotten to this point if these candidates were in the Presidents place based on their previous statements.

And it's still not over. Capturing Saddam was not our primary goal in Iraq. Deposing him and building a democracy were. That hasn't changed.

Turns out that George Bush is the one with the caveat: "I also have a message for all Americans: The capture of Saddam Hussein does not mean the end of violence in Iraq."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031214-3.html

I suppose, of course, it's too late to offer a similar deal in which I'll proudly support the capture of Saddam Hussein and cheer such news (a simple task considering I'd do it anyway) in return for warbloggers not opening up the partisanship with "Well I bet the lefties won't like this" posts. (Scrolls down) Yep.

It's kind of saddening that because the argument can't be used that "the left" isn't happy about this, the argument has to be lowered to "the left isn't subservient to the right's happiness."

It's the Uday/Qusay redux: for a 24-to-48-hour period, those who were in favor of the war get to prescribe how those opposed to the war should post, and will thereafter compile posts and will rank them according to jubilation (positive) and caveats (negative).

Not accusing this weblog, of course.

Im with datarat on this one. This is a complete 180 on behalf of Dean and Clark. Definitely not something you look for in a president.

As far as that being something (or not) to look for in a President....

Isn't it better for a mature adult, when confronted w/ evidence that they have been using mistaken judgement, to be able to stand up and say "You have convinced me - I am mistaken - congratulations"

THAT is not making a 180 in my estimation - that is being a mature and thinking person rather than an idolitarian.

Docotorfrau

Yes. In some cases it would be being mature enough to say your wrong. Unfortunately, this is obviously not the case here. I believe it is more aptly classified as political back pedalling. If, as Dean and Clark have been saying, it was wrong to enter into the war, then why are they so happy about it?
Glib remarks from glib candidates.

For more headache inducing bovine scatology go to NPR and listen to the spin they put on this, hell, they are almost in tears.

Seems like a silly single issue reason to endorse a candidate to me. Am I missing something here?

August: Relax! You're gonna give yourself a stroke before you hit 30.

Val,

I'll repost something I said in another comment, because I think that it applies to how some of the candidates may feel...

"I was...not very happy with how [the Iraq issue] started out. But I firmly believe that once such an undertaking is started, it needs to be carried thru and carried out WELL. Now that we are there, we need to clean it up and not leave until the job is done. To pull out prematurely creates nearly a greater internal disaster than if we had not gone in the first place.
Therefore, although I didn't support things to begin with, I was EXTREMELY happy to hear the news this morning!"

Val, so you think that accepting that the past has already happened and cannot be changed - requiring one to move on - is "backpedaling"?

Interestingly enough Clark made some statements to the Beeb which were less than positive. He started bleating about a future trial as well. The only one who gave a pretty uneqivocal welcome to this development is Lieberman. But then again, he is the only decent one of the lot.

Before Jonathon actually throws his support to Clark, he should read some of Clark's other statements.

August, you have heard what Kerry had to say about this event, didn't you? He spent about 2 seconds acknowledging the good of it, then spent 15 minutes berating the President.

...but of course, Kerry isn't a front-runner, so he doesn't matter. /sarcasm

"It's the Uday/Qusay redux: for a 24-to-48-hour period, those who were in favor of the war get to prescribe how those opposed to the war should post, and will thereafter compile posts and will rank them according to jubilation (positive) and caveats (negative)."

Just 24 to 48 hours, Norbizness, and then we can forget all about it and move on to predicting the next quagmire.

Keep telling yourself that.