Day: June 21, 2005

How can you be argumentative, unrelenting and unrepentant one day and contrite, humble, and tear-jerking the next? If you are Dick Durbin (or Bill Clinton), you can do that and more…

Sen. Durbin Apologizes for Gitmo Remarks

Under fire from Republicans and some fellow Democrats, Sen. Dick Durbin apologized Tuesday for comparing American interrogators at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp to Nazis and other historically infamous figures.

“Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line,” the Illinois Democrat said. “To them I extend my heartfelt apologies.”

You should have thought about what you were saying before you said it Dick. You need to control your hatred for Bush, because it makes you say bad things. Because you and your party hate everything this president stands for, you are willing to stand up and make outrageous statements like this. The ‘hate bush, say bad things’ disease is a cancer running wild within the Democratic party. You must lead in an effort to obliterate it.

His voice quaking and tears welling in his eyes, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate also apologized to any soldiers who felt insulted by his remarks.

“They’re the best. I never, ever intended any disrespect for them,” he said.

Oppose Bush, oppose everything he believes in, block all legislation the Republicans bring to the Congress, demonstrate against the war, and fling anti-American sentiment, but love the troops. For the life of me, I don’t know how they can pull this off with a straight face.

The apology came a week after Durbin, the Senate minority whip, quoted from an FBI agent’s report describing detainees at the Naval base in a U.S.-controlled portion of Cuba as being chained to the floor without food or water in extreme temperatures.

“If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings,” the senator said June 14.

The comment created a buzz on the Internet and among conservative talk radio hosts, but Durbin initially refused to apologize.

“This administration should apologize to the American people for abandoning the Geneva Conventions and authorizing torture techniques that put our troops at risk and make Americans less secure,” he said the day after his initial comments.

By last Friday, Durbin was trying to clarify his comments, yet the White House and top Republicans including Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist refused to relent. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in an interview scheduled for broadcast Wednesday on Fox News radio’s “The Tony Snow Show,” tried to equate the comment with actress Jane Fonda calling U.S. soldiers war criminals during a visit to North Vietnam in 1972.

On Tuesday, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley — a fellow Democrat — added his voice to the chorus of criticism, saying, “I think it’s a disgrace to say that any man or woman in the military would act like that.”

Durbin said in his apology: “I made reference to Nazis, to Soviets, and other repressive regimes. Mr. President, I’ve come to understand that’s a very poor choice of words.”

But you still believe in the outrageous claims you made Senator! You just regret that you picked the wrong words. This is the problem with the Democrats. They throw out unsubstantiated claims, use certain words to further flavor those claims, they get in trouble for the words they used, they apologize for the words, but not for the misplaced accusation.

This is no apology. This is covering your butt.

You should (still) be ashamed Senator, and you should resign.

I can’t help it. Nowadays, when I read press statements, or when a source (credited or not) puts news out, a little movie runs in my head about how the decision was made to release the information. When I read this today, the movie played right on cue:

Via Drudge – General: U.S. likely to begin drawdown of forces in Iraq next year

The US military will probably begin withdrawing some forces from Iraq by next March after a political transition to an elected Iraqi government is completed, a top US commander said Tuesday.

AFP wire reports: Lieutenant General John Vines said that any drawdown would depend on conditions on the ground and that an abrupt large-scale withdrawal would be unwise. But he said as many as four or five brigades would probably come out in March.

“I suspect we will probably draw down capability after the election, because Iraqi security forces are more capable,” Vines said in a two-way press conference via video link from Iraq.

The Bush administration has been under pressure (a lot of pressure) lately to put a time table on the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Over and over again, the president has stated that the troops will come home when the mission is complete. It has been his position from the beginning. I admire this. He has principals and commitments and he’s sticking to ‘em. The media really plays this up too. They portray the Bush administration as people who won’t budge, won’t compromise, won’t stop until they get their way. Truth is, I don’t believe there are as many strong-willed people in the administration as the media likes to believe. I think there are people who (contrary to the president) do read public opinion polls. I think there are personnel who worry about putting out good news on a daily basis, and I think there are PR folks who attempt to send small messages and float trial balloons through others to see how the public (through the media) will react. In other words, this administration is no different than previous ones.

OK, here’s what the little movie in my head looks like.

I see a small group of administration officials sitting in a room talking over the issue of troop withdrawal and the media’s unrelenting pressure to force the White House to give a date (preferably a date, an hour, minute and the second) as to when our men and women will leave Iraq. They’re all reviewing the latest poll results and they’re nervous. They are convinced that the public wants to believe that the troops will be coming home soon. They decide to find a military General in the field who will go on record and hypothesize about troop withdrawal. They make sure that the General gives a pseudo-withdrawal date, that he mentions how many troops could be coming home, and the reason for their release from combat duty.

Presto, instant news. Instant grist for the mill. Red meat for the media meat eaters.

Now the administration waits to see how the media will report the story. Will the news spread in such a way as to have a temporary lifting effect on the presidents job approval numbers? Is it enough? Will they need to bring out a few more high ranking military types who will go on record? Maybe they’ll need to book a General to visit with Tim Russert, or another high profile talking head? Maybe there’s a Senator who will make a statement? Will any of this buy the White House time to formulate additional stories to further improve public opinion?

All unanswerable questions.

So, that’s the movie I see in my head. My hunch tells me I’m not very far off the mark. After all, at the end of the day, it’s politics…it’s about keeping a majority in the next election cycle (2006) and laying the ground work for a good nominee with a tight message for 2008.