Troops
Wizbang is covering the proposed troop increases in Iraq and the Demorats typical response. ince my husband is one of thos troops that the dems want to pull the rug out from under, I take this kind of personally.
I'm going to be staying with my liberal Democrat parents during most of this year until Aaryk comes home. If the Dems succeed in cutting the funds for these additional troops we will be having some...interesting...conversations around the dinner table.
Sigh....now it's going to be an even LONGER year for me....
Tags-GWOT
posted by Kyrie Drake @ 2:34 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
I remember talking about this--and you got me thinking about the whole issue all day today!
First, I agree with you. I agree with you that the best idea is to send more troops and get the mission finished. I also agree that, if one does not think that's the best way (i.e. if one thinks we need to get out immediately), there are legitimate ways to argue that, but cutting funding, sabotaging the efforts of the troops already in the field, in order to make the war not worth it for the authorities, is manipulative and comes at way too high of a price.
I guess I'd also argue not to hold individual democrats responsible for the party's policy. To illustrate, I'm registered as a Republican. That means that I'm declaring my support for their policies (i.e. I do have some responsibility, because I'm helping make it happen), but I don't have direct control over the things the Republican party advocates or doesn't advocate. Most of the time I'm still working to understand them! It's not like it is with the Church, where you subscribe to the entire creed in order to be a Catholic. You can be a Republican or Democrat and disagree with elements of the party's policy. I think the best thing is to convince enough Democrats that cutting funding in any way, shape, or form, is not the answer (more than ineffective--it's costly and it hurts the people defending us, including your husband). But here's hoping that enough individual deomcrats agree to change the party's position.
I guess I'd also argue not to hold individual democrats responsible for the party's policy. To illustrate, I'm registered as a Republican. That means that I'm declaring my support for their policies (i.e. I do have some responsibility, because I'm helping make it happen), but I don't have direct control over the things the Republican party advocates or doesn't advocate.
I hold individuals of ANY party responsible for their party's plicies to the extent that they DO something about policies they disagree with. One person can't change a party policy, but you CAN make your voice heard to those in Congress who DO have th power.
If you choose to sit back and do NOTHING when something is brought to your attention, then it must mean that you agree with the policy. in that case, I can and will hold you accountable for the policy.
But, that's just me.
I agree with you, and you phrased it well; we're not talking at odds here. I think the challenge is to convince individuals that a particular policy is wrong, and then show them how to advocate for change.
Post a Comment
<< Home