Daniel in Brookline: An E-mail from Howard Dean

Wednesday, May 02, 2007

An E-mail from Howard Dean

First, the screen shot:

Hey, how about that! How did I ever get in Mr. Dean's address book?

Oh, now I remember. On April 26th, I saw a listing online to a Democrat petition, spearheaded by Howard Dean; he objected to something Rudy Giuliani had said the day before, and wanted people to flood him with angry messages. Well, the form didn't dictate what the message should say... so I sent him an "attaboy" message. And now I'm on the Dean's list; isn't that special!

(And no, the petition never promised to keep my e-mail address secret. So call it a slightly subversive method of accumulating e-mail addresses for the Democrats. Never mind, I didn't give him my primary address... and it's nice to be able to see what the Democrats are up to now and then.)

So. Let's take a closer look at this, shall we?

Dear Daniel,

President Bush has hit a new low -- and I'm not talking about his 28% approval ratings.

Today, he ignored the majority of Americans and he defied the majority of Congress. And what's worst, he told our brave men and women in uniform that they will be the ones to pay the price.

First and foremost -- defying the majority of Congress, in issuing a Presidential veto, is part of his job. That's why the President has the power to veto a Congressional bill -- so that, when Congress tries to undermine the President, or usurp some of his authority, he can stop them from doing so. And, as it turns out, that's exactly what Congress is trying to do -- by threatening to pull the funding for a war that they authorized.

Nor did the President "ignore the majority of Americans". The majority of Americans didn't vote for this pork-laden power-hungry defeatist bill; the majority of Congress did. If Dean wants to claim that the President defied the majority of Congress, well, okay, I can buy that -- but, again, that's part of his job.

As for the troops having to pay the price -- spare us, please. The President made it clear, when this bill was still being debated on the floor of the House and Senate, that he would veto it -- and he explained exactly why. In other words, the Democratic leadership of both houses decided to send the President a spending bill he couldn't sign. So who's playing politics with the troops, exactly?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: a Democratic president wouldn't veto that bill. We put forward a thoughtful plan and the President rejected it.

Dean, you're revealing more than you know. Of course, a Democratic President wouldn't veto that bill -- one of the most disgustingly pork-ridden spending bills seen in recent years. Lots of people accuse Democrats of spending us to oblivion, Dean; you're just confirming it.

Only a Democratic victory in 2008 will ensure that this war comes to a responsible end.

Ah, now we get down to brass tacks! This isn't about the troops, Mr. Dean; it's about ending the war. And it's not even about ending the war as a viable end in itself; it's about ending the war as a way to recapture the White House in 2008. (We should be grateful to Dr. Dean for being so blunt about it.)

The President has said it many times, as have many other people -- but let me just restate the obvious: you don't tell your opponent when you plan to walk away. That's as true for major warfare as it is for any competitive sport. If one team announces that they're ready to leave, then the other team has already won -- for they know that all they have to do is wait. Once the first team is gone, the second team can score points with no opposition, as long as they want, until they are the undisputed victors.

By demanding specific withdrawal dates, the Democrats are telling the terrorists, the ones who saw off people's heads, the ones who set off bombs in kindergartens and hospitals, that all they have to do is wait -- and they'll soon be able to terrorize Iraq to their heart's content. And, having proven that America can be persuaded to cut and run, they'll know that they can do it again.

What Howard Dean is saying -- and, make no mistake, as DNC chairman, he is the voice of the Democratic Party -- is that the Democrats have given up. Whether the war is winnable or not isn't the issue; they're no longer interested in fighting.

(Well, they're not interested in fighting the war, anyway. They seem quite interested in fighting President Bush.)

Dean is living up to the worst stereotypes that Osama bin Laden ever had about Americans. He is saying that, since the war is taking longer than some people expected, and we're suffering more casualties than we'd like, it's time to quit and go home. He's saying, in short, that America can be beaten, and sent home with its tail between its legs, by anyone -- anyone -- with good P.R. and a little patience.

Have we had enough? Or shall we listen to some more?

To ensure a Democratic victory, we have to build our election operation now -- we just can't afford to wait until there's a nominee. Make a contribution and help take back the White House today:

http://www.democrats.org/EndTheWar

Here's what Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had to say about the Democratic plan to start bringing our troops home:

"The debate in Congress...has been helpful in demonstrating to the Iraqis that American patience is limited. The strong feelings expressed in the Congress about the timetable has had a positive impact...in terms of communicating to the Iraqis that this is not an open-ended commitment."

But President Bush's veto sends the opposite message. It refuses to allow the Iraqi people to stand up for their own country. It blatantly disregards the need for a political solution. Worst of all, it puts the lives of our troops right in the middle of it.

That's not a road to victory. It's a road to nowhere.

"Refuses to allow the Iraqi people to stand up for their own country"? Just what, exactly, do you think our troops are doing in Iraq, Dr. Dean? They're training the Iraqis to stand on their own.

Of course, this can take time, particularly for a country shattered by war and years of a brutal dictatorship. How long did US troops stay in Germany after WWII? How about Japan?

The United States has done this before, after all. Japan became peaceful, prosperous, and democratic, in a radical break from their earlier history -- under a constitution that we wrote for them. And there were die-hard Japanese aplenty, ready to continue fighting after the war was over. But we didn't give up then, and the results were amazing.

So why, Dr. Dean, do you think it makes so much sense to give up now?

The Democratic Party is working overtime to stop this madness. We're doing all we can to change course in Iraq and to elect leaders who are accountable to the American people.

Can you help support the Democratic Party's 2008 election operation? The stakes are so high, we can't afford to wait.

http://www.democrats.org/EndTheWar

When President Bush rejects a troop withdrawal plan supported by nearly two-thirds of the country, he's not working for the American people -- he's working for himself.

Put your money where your mouth is, Dr. Dean. If two-thirds of the country supports ending the war, then you'll have no problem overriding the President's veto, will you?

The wave of support to end this war won't stop.

Too bad. I truly wish it would.

The Democratic Party is ramping up the pressure on President Bush every day, and we're working hard to make sure that none of his Republican allies will continue his legacy.

Now there's a scary thought! "We intend to make sure this war ends in an American defeat, one way or another."

This country has suffered through President Bush's failed policies for long enough. Help us put an end to this terrible chapter in American history:

http://www.democrats.org/EndTheWar

One veto isn't enough to stop us. The Democratic Party brought change in 2006, and with your help we'll do it again in 2008.

Sincerely,

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

The "terrible chapter", Dr. Dean, is the one that will be written about you -- and Nancy Pelosi, and Jack Murtha, and Harry Reid, and the rest of the defeat-America-if-it-helps-the-Democrats crowd.

History has not been kind to Neville Chamberlain. He had many accomplishments as Britain's Prime Minister, but the only one people remember is the nonaggression pact he signed with Hitler, calling it "peace in our time".

History will not be kind to you either.

Labels: Dhimmi Democrats