The Left’s reaction to Petraeus, part 1

I wanted to examine the Democrats’ reaction to General Petraeus’ testimony at Capitol Hill. Since his report, the Left, notably it’s elected leaders, have come forth in a cavalcade of collective protest.

I propagated the notion in part II of my surge reaction essay that the Left is nothing more than a bunch of small, ill-behaved children. Upon not getting their way, in this case complete and utter withdrawal and surrender from Iraq followed by head bowing to terrorists, they throw themselves violently on the floor, kicking and screaming.

The reaction demonstrated by the following Democratically-elected officials has not changed my opinion whatsoever. Naturally, the Democrats disliked Petraeus’ report, for it conveyed news, recommendations, suggestions, that the Left does not want to hear. Furthermore, it countermands the notion that we are losing in Iraq.

First, in the following article from WEAU news (Wisconsin news station), Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold has voiced his opposition to the Petraeus report:

“Senator Russ Feingold raised tough questions when the top commander of US forces in Iraq and the US Ambassador there appeared at a congressional hearing.

Feingold, a Democrat, described the Iraq War as a diversion from the task of fighting terror. He says the US should have focused on Afghanistan and Pakistan in the fight against al-Qaeda.

He challenged ambassador Ryan Crocker to say what was more important, the situation in Iraq or in Afghanistan.

Feingold raised similar questions with General David Petraeus

Then he said both men were not willing to comment seriously about how the war relates to the global fight against terrorism”

And in this article from the Chicago Sun-Tribune:

Pelosi to Bush: ‘It’s an insult’

IRAQ | President will pull out 30,000 troops, but Democrat scoffs

September 12, 2007

BY MATTHEW LEE AND ANNE FLAHERTY

WASHINGTON — President Bush will tell the nation Thursday evening that he plans to reduce the American troop presence in Iraq by as many as 30,000 by next summer.

Bush will endorse the recommendations of his top general and top diplomat in Iraq, following their appearance at hearings in Congress.

The president will say he understands Americans’ deep concerns. Bush will continue by saying that, after hearing from Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, he has decided to reduce the U.S. military presence but not abandon Iraq to chaos.

Bush will place more conditions on reductions than his general did, insisting that conditions on the ground must warrant cuts and that events could change the plan.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Bush appears poised to bring the country back to where it was before the election that put Democrats in control of Congress — with 130,000 troops in Iraq. ”Please. It’s an insult to the intelligence of the American people that that is a new direction in Iraq,” she said.

Petraeus’ testimony appeared to solidify Bush’s support among Republicans — key because they have the power to block a fixed withdrawal deadline.

”My sense is the general has been so successful in his testimony that positions have hardened,” said Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.). AP

And finally, from AOL News Election Blog:

Pelosi Slams Bush Policy on Iraq

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has issued a press release slamming the Bush administration’s current plans regarding Iraq mainly because, according to Pelosi, the overall plan of the administration is to keep a significant number of troops in Iraq for ten years or more.

Here is an excerpt:

"Under the Bush plan, 130,000 Americans will remain in harm’s way in Iraq at a cost of hundreds of billions of additional taxpayer dollars. This status quo policy was rejected by General James Jones, whose recent report stated that significant force reductions are possible and that we must reduce our military footprint in Iraq."

The press release has been reprinted on the web via Yahoo News and it clearly shows the General Petraeus’ report had little impact on the Democratic leadership as this press release is a clear response indicating that the anti-war factions of the Democratic leadership have yet to be swayed. How this press release goes over with the public remains to be seen, but more than likely the public would not support another ten years in the theater.“

crossposted at The Twin Cities Conservative