That's the way the GOP crumbles...
In a recent memo to the GOP, Ken Mehlman warned Republicans not to split with President Bush. He says that a divide in the party could lead to low voter turnout in November.
Mr. Mehlmen, could it be that Republicans want to distance themselves from the President because of his disastrous policies? Could what really concerns voters be that Republicans rubber stamp everything that Bush does?
I don't believe that the problem in November for Republicans will be turnout. I believe it will be that right-leaning moderates have had enough and will vote for Democrats instead.
Just a thought. I've been really busy, so blogging has taken a back seat. I will try to be more active.
Cheers,
Jeff
PS- Bush is now blaming Saddam for the increased sectarian violence in Iraq. Wasn't he a secular leader, and, more importantly, isn't he in jail? I don't think I see the connection...hmmm.
Mr. Mehlmen, could it be that Republicans want to distance themselves from the President because of his disastrous policies? Could what really concerns voters be that Republicans rubber stamp everything that Bush does?
I don't believe that the problem in November for Republicans will be turnout. I believe it will be that right-leaning moderates have had enough and will vote for Democrats instead.
Just a thought. I've been really busy, so blogging has taken a back seat. I will try to be more active.
Cheers,
Jeff
PS- Bush is now blaming Saddam for the increased sectarian violence in Iraq. Wasn't he a secular leader, and, more importantly, isn't he in jail? I don't think I see the connection...hmmm.
posted by Jeff at
12:11 AM
3 Comments:
If you read Bush's March 29th speech, he isn't blaming Saddam in a direct way for the current violence - what he said was that insurgents are using some of the same tactics that Saddam had used during his reign to foment sectarian divisions. The AP headline was misleadingly written.
By
Garry, At
1:17 PM, April 03, 2006
Bush said:
"Today, some Americans ask whether removing Saddam caused the divisions and instability we're now seeing. In fact, much of the animosity and violence we now see is the legacy of Saddam Hussein. He is a tyrant who exacerbated sectarian divisions to keep himself in power."
The problem is he has it backwards. Saddam was a secular leader who tried to keep the sects at bay to remain in power. How does exacerbating differences keep a country stable? Bush is right; Saddam was a tyrant. But, he wasn't a religious fanatic. To blame him for the violence is a straw man. The AP reported it correctly.
Cheers,
Jeff
By
Jeff, At
11:46 AM, April 04, 2006
The Baath Party certainly ran a secular government, but Saddam regularly portrayed himself as a pious religious leader, and constantly invoked the name of Allah in his speeches. His government officially referred to the Iraq-Iran war as the Qadisiyat Saddam, in reference to a 7th century battle that has great historic significance in Islam. Saddam repeatedly called for jihad against America, and called the 9/11 attacks "God's punishment". So the idea that Hussein was merely an areligious secularist is simply not accurate.
And "stability" is the last thing that Saddam wanted. Documents captured from the state security apparatus in 1991 showed that his government maintained power through "insecurity and suspicion", conducting campaigns of violence based in large part on ethnic identity, helping to lay the groundwork for today's ethnic divisions. Of course some of these divisions pre-date the Baathists; many Sunnis and Shias inside as well as outside of Iraq have long considered each other to be kafir.
By
Garry, At
1:43 PM, April 04, 2006
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home