Is Bush now a Defeatist?

President Bush a defeatist? Of course not!. If the Republicans hold on to one House in 2006- The House of Representatives or The Senate, President Bush will not change the course of the USA in Iraq.

He has said that he would leave that to the next President. Hillary can pull the troops out and then when a horrendous explosion( I hope not) takes place in a major US city because Iraqi murderers were not busy fighting US troops in Iraq but rather could take time to inflitrate our country, she will be left holding the bag.

The same people who have been telling us that we must not criticize the president because it emboldens the enemy are now ripping that same president apart themselves.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, concluding a four-day trip to Iraq and Afghanistan, said today that critics of the Bush administration's Iraq policy are encouraging terrorists and complicating the ongoing U.S. war on terrorism.

Among others, Donald Rumsfeld

Quote:

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, concluding a four-day trip to Iraq and Afghanistan, said today that critics of the Bush administration's Iraq policy are encouraging terrorists and complicating the ongoing U.S. war on terrorism.

Rumsfeld was referring to criticism of the war policy, which is not the same as criticizing the President.

Ticomaya wrote:

Rumsfeld was referring to criticism of the war policy, which is not the same as criticizing the President.

Criticizing the President's war policy is not the same as criticizing the President?

Your view is that criticism of the President is fine as long as it deals only with non-policy matters?

However, I agree with the notion that being critical of the war in Iraq emboldens the enemy.

The two are completely conflated, Tico. You cannot criticize one without the other; and that's Bush's doing, as you well know. Years of matching yourself up with the war you started for political gain leads to this effect.

Cycloptichorn

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/08/defeatism-and-attacks-on-commander-in_14.html

From Michelle Maulkin:

Quote:

Israel and the West surrender to Hizballah.

Terrorists and the U.N. win.

Here are the depressing details:

The Conservative pundits are out in force, sadly attempting to distance themselves from an administration whose arse they were once kissing endlessly throughout their fascist rise to power. But now that Bush is utter poison to Republicans who wish to win in November, the subtle (and not so subtle) attempts to pretend that they never even heard of Bush are beyond ridiculous.

Just about every wingut pundit has called the recent cease fire agreement a "defeat" for America and a "win" for Hezbollah. Isn't this grand? The far right winguttery is weighing in, and they are not too pleased with Bush right now. Actually, they're attacking him at this stage based on the recent cease fire agreement. In essence, they are criticizing him in a time of WAR.

Ticomaya wrote:

However, I agree with the notion that being critical of the war in Iraq emboldens the enemy.

Where's your evidence to support this assertion? How is the "enemy" (whoever that is) emboldened by domestic opposition to the war? Where's your evidence for a cause-and-effect relationship here?