Senate Rejects Troop Withdrawal Amendment
I think the significance of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s latest attempt at high-visibility appeasement in the War on Terror is best summed up by a Dr. Seuss cartoon from 1942. Just replace the word “Nazi” with the word “Islamofascist”…
(Image from the University of California at San Diego’s Catalog of Political Cartoons by Dr. Seuss.)
Just replace the word “Nazi” with the word “Islamofascist”
Wow. Does anything sum up the political right in this country, at this moment, better than this sentence?
MRH, I think this sentence is pretty good too:
“Nobody died when Clinton lied.”
mrh,
I don’t really understand the point you’re trying to make, but I do know that saying that it’s not possible for somthing called “Islamofascism” or “Islamic Fascism” to exist makes about as much sense as saying it wasn’t possible for German Fascism to have existed, or for Italian Fascism to have existed, etc. etc. More detail here.
Ah the stench of shallow and simplistic rhetoric coming from each direction ….
From the partisan left we have the incoherent claim that the President lied to the American people, the UN and made up intelligence reports for Congress so that the US could invade Iraq for the purpose of his pleasure in seeing military men and women along with Iraqi civilians die. And the complete denial that there are people out there who want to destroy the United States. And those are the people who are killing our military personnel in Iraq. (because acknowledging that reality forces some thoughtful reasoning).
From the partisan right we have the denial that there was any risk to invading Iraq. The invasion was a moral, political and security necessity based on 9/11 and that there were truly no alternatives. Also, the denial that the “Mission Accomplished’ PR stunt may have been the worst in history.
I happen to support the intent of the war. I do acknowledge that it has not gone according to plan and that we are now involved in a bad situation where the options appear to be either bad or worse.
There is a legitimate debate as to 1) whether the risks were worth the benefits in taking out Saddam and 2) whether the US should stay or go and when.
Unfortunately, there is little of this as most people seem to have allied themselves with one of the two sides where the ONLY agenda is demonizing the opposition for the sole purpose of political gain and harm regardless of the reality and consequences.
I don’t really understand the point you’re trying to make, but I do know that saying that it’s not possible for somthing called “Islamofascism” or “Islamic Fascism” to exist makes about as much sense as saying it wasn’t possible for German Fascism to have existed
Did I say that? I don’t remember saying that.
msteven,
Very much agree with your sentiments. Very well said!
Justin,
A fanstastic cartoon. Only comment I have is how could this Senate amendment have failed? We’re always told our midget warrior Jack Reed is god. Or was that dog? woof woof Well NEA Pat? lol
Make that kudos to Andrew for the classic cartoon. Spot on!!
“warrior Jack Reed”
It was a mistake on the part of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld not to increase the presence of American troops when the Iraqi museums were looted and other things happened to make it clear that we did not control the country after the initial notable success of the invasion. And Anthony makes an interesting point about our expenditure of resources in Iraq in the bigger picture of the war on terrorism.
But I also cannot go along with “let’s get out in 120 days”. There are rumors that Jack Reed would be … what, Secretary of Defense in a Hillary administration? Another reason not to vote for Hillary Clinton.
Since it was I who first mentioned Dr. Seuss’ political cartoons, I’m glad to see Andrew posting one. I hope everyone checks the link to see more of them. I haven’t looked at all of them, but the ones i’ve seen I think are great.
Seuss’ anti-isolationist cartoons go well back to the beginning of 1941. At that time, of course, the isolationist (‘appeaser’?) “cats” were the Republicans. Both the Lend-Lease and Conscription Acts received ovewhelming support from Democrats, and both were overwhelmingly opposed by Republicans. This would hardly be worth mentioning, except that it puts me in mind of Mac Owens’ posts drawing conclusions from the historical roles of the Dems. and GOP on race.
Another question is whether Seuss’ point (or Andrew’s) is that people ought not to oppose the war, or that both proponants and opponants ought be behave less like wild animals and more like civilized people? Andrew, did you see any Seuss cartoons about Wendell Wilkie, the Republican 1941 candidate for president, who said ” “We, who stand ready to serve our country behind our Commander in Chief, nevertheless retain the right, and I will say the duty, to debate the course of our government.””.
Thomas,
1. I thought this cartoon was suitable for this moment because I don’t understand what purpose was served by the Senate all-nighter that couldn’t have been achieved in regular debate. What actually was gained in return for Harry Reid emphasizing our domestic disunity to our foreign enemies?
2. I have no doubt that if Dr. Seuss were writing war cartoons today, he’d be bashing Republicans every bit as much as Democrats. Trying to fight a war without raising taxes to pay for it certainly wouldn’t have flown with him.
On the other hand, many of his cartoons are critical of Congress for unreasonably trying to tie the President’s hands during a war, and of what he thought were vacuousness of complaints that the President had become a dictator”. Those have some resonance today too…
3. I appreciate your historical awareness of Dr. Seuss, but, for the record, I do have to point out that I posted on his political cartoons as far back as March of 2006. I bought the “Dr. Seuss Goes to War” collection a few months after Sept. 11.
Dear Tim,
Whether you like it or not, Jack Reed will be your XSenator until at least 2014. What does it say about your party if you can’t find a candidate to compete with, your words, a midget warrior? Are we then to surmise that your party does not have collectively the stuff that midget warriors are made out of?
There’s a bigger issue here that I cannot stand that you allude to:
We have created a need for a super majority to get anything done in the Senate. Nobody has fillibustered in a while.
We should have seen Jeff Session reading the Bible, Lindsey Graham going over bar-be-que recipies and Mel Martinez reading the Miami phonebook. That’s a fillibuster. It is real, it has gravitas. Take the floor, keep the floor, keep talking, debate in the Senate is unlimited. That’s what the Founders intended.
This whole 60 votes or else thing is not what the Founders intended.
Andrew,
My apologies for having greedily tried to claim credit for bringing Dr. Seuss’ political cartoons to A.R.’s attention. I was overly anxious to want to think that I was making a contribution.
I appreciate your fair-minded approach.
regards,
Thomas
I actually agree with Bobby, in so much as I wouldn’t mind seeing some good old fashioned filibustering, a la “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” myself. I’ve always found them to be much more informative and engaging than what passes for usual Senate business (I’m a C-Span junkie, so anything different would be an improvement).
The 60 vote threshold is to cut off or stop debate. The Senate Majority Leader (Reid), if he really wanted to, could insist on making potential filibusterers actually keep speaking — but that would “tie up” the Senate from doing anything else in the interim. But he won’t, because he’s spineless and he knows he doesn’t and won’t have the votes for cloture. The funny part is that he apparently doesn’t want to “tie up” the Senate, but can anyone name me anything of consequence that this might be overshadowing in the Senate right now?
Dear Will,
The Founders intended that every so often, the Senate would come to a screeching halt. It gets the country to pay attention. I didn’t like the all-niter Santorum ran on the judges issue; I didn’t like this recent one. Those weren’t about attention; rather both efforts were about empty noise.
Dear Will,
The Founders intended that every so often, the Senate would come to a screeching halt. It gets the country to pay attention. I didn’t like the all-niter Santorum ran on the judges issue; I didn’t like this recent one. Those weren’t about attention; rather both efforts were about empty noise.
Thomas,
Well, to be 100% accurate, it was your comment that jogged my memory about the Dr. Seuss cartoons relevant to the current debate…