In the coming months, our national attention will be shifting from political pork
to political crow. Democrats have put themselves in a position where they will be
eating a lot of it, as it now appears there is a chance of victory in Iraq. All
those on the left who have been advocating surrender will have pie on their face
or crow on their plates.
Major cracks are starting to appear in the ranks of Democrats. A few of the more
politically astute are starting to stray off the reservation, eschewing the lockstep
Democrat talking points and positioning themselves for the worst. The worst being
victory in Iraq.
It all started with that darn editorial in the New York Times. The NYT is the
equivalent of the bible on the left, pretty much in charge of alerting liberal Democrats
how to think on any given subject. The seers at the Times opined that maybe, just
maybe, the surge in Iraq might be, gasp, working.
Though reports of good news have been trickling out of Iraq for a few months, they
were pretty much discounted by leading libs as 'propaganda.' Then along comes the
Times editorial which illuminates and validates the fact that, gee, maybe it's remotely
possible that America might be making headway against fanatics determined to see
us burn in hell.
If the New York Times prints it, then it must be so. Thus begins a reality re-alignment
for the few Democrats capable of thinking independently of the party bosses. The
'non-deniers,' if you will.
Ever wonder how Democrats eat crow? First, they redefine the meaning of 'crow' to
filet mignon. Then, they say it was filet all along, and proclaim how very tasty
it is. Yummy.
Enter Richard Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate and assistant majority leader.
Sen. Durbin has publicly conceded that the surge of American troops has led to military
progress in Iraq. This heresy would normally land him on the D cocktail party list
if not for the fact that this reality, having been validated by the NYT, is now,
well, real.
Senator Casey, a Democrat of Pennsylvania, has also acknowledged recent military
progress in Iraq, telling AP last week that a good argument could be made that U.S.
troops have actually won the war in Iraq. Keep in mind, this is a Democrat speaking.
Astute politician that he is, Sen. Casey made sure to hedge his bet just in case
there's still a chance his fellow Dems are successful in their 'surrender now' strategy.
Sen. Casey told CNN that he saw little evidence that the Iraqi parliament would soon
reach a political compact between Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis. In other words, we
may defeat the terrorists BUT, major doubts remain regarding the ability of Iraqis
to govern themselves.
Considering that Sen. Casey's very own Congress scores only 3% approval for their
handling of the Iraq war, the credibility of his argument is somewhat compromised.
Somehow, America has survived an inept and sometimes corrupt Congress. I'm betting the
Iraqis can, also.
Those inconvenient truths aside, Casey and Durbin are now positioned to be prophets,
no matter what the outcome. These are two smart dudes. And now that they have opened
the floodgates, the race is on as most Democrats frantically jockey to reposition
themselves to this new reality.
The NYT reported on Saturday that Democrat presidential candidates are now setting
out positions that "could leave the US engaged in Iraq for years." On various talk
shows, we're hearing phrases like "..ending a war can be as complicated as starting
one" etc, being voiced by leading liberals, excuse me, progressives, who
only last week were adamantly advocating for complete surrender, oops, I meant troop
re-deployment.
As time draws near for Gen. Petraeus' report on conditions in Iraq, expect more Democrats
to reposition themselves. (For those of us in flyover country, this means 'flip-flop')
The unacceptable fact that Bush may have been proven right is not something
Democrats can comprehend, much less acknowledge. The only way to live with this
wholesale refutation of their worldview is complete denial or utter revision. I
expect most will opt for revision.
Fortunately, Dems have been laying the groundwork for years. Their insistence that
everyone be 'empowered' to ascribe whatever definition they feel comfortable with
to words, truths and positions will now serve them well. When words mean nothing,
they can mean anything.
Those most skilled in political spin and most lacking in personal convictions will
undoubtedly survive and flourish by relying on tried and true tactics:
Plan A: Dems will sacrifice one of their own, a scapegoat, thrown to the lions as a token
to the unwashed masses (for the un-nuanced, that means you and me) and/or
Plan B: Democrats will quickly find a new 'enemy' to divert the issue from their utter
lack of competence.
These tactics work - just ask Hillary. Untold numbers of tin-pot dictators
have used them to great effect: By focusing attention on the Great Satan, America,
their subjects won't see the real enemy, their own crackpot dictator. Surefire.
Diversionary tactics are another proven staple of Democrat governance.
Couple those
tactics with the unifying power of a common enemy and even the most incompetent
politician can not only flip-flop on this issue, but appear to be strong and principled
while doing so. Or even become President.
With liberals' proven skills in re-defining reality to their own specifications,
I expect the coming 'repositioning' will prove more entertaining than American Idol.
By this time next year, the wholesale Democrat opposition to the Iraq war will have
been flushed down the memory hole. Airbrushed, sanitised and revised.
These political gyrations would be the stuff of entertaining soap operas if not
for the fact that we're talking the survival of our country. Games are part of the
political process. All well and good. Politicians must necessarily adjust positions
based on changing circumstances. This is reality.
What also qualifies for reality is the fact that the Democrat party, with the aid
of the old media, has been actively aiding and abetting our enemies by advocating
surrender, undermining troop morale and doing anything and everything to undermine
America's struggle with Islamic terrorists, both at home and abroad.
The good news is, the tide is turning in Iraq. The good news is, the left has not
been ultimately successful in its efforts to undermine America (Bush). The good
news for Democrats is, they still have a willing media available to enable them
to redefine a 180 degree about-face into an act of political courage.
Let them turn crow into filet. It's a small price to pay. Meanwhile, sit back and
enjoy America's latest new-reality show. It's unreal.
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and senior editor for conservative news
site www.RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Article may be reprinted, with attribution
