FRONT-PAGE MAGAZINE: "MURTHA, RESIGN!"

I'm asking every blogger to reprint at least the link -- and if possible, the entire article -- from Front Page Magazine. It properly and appropriately says that John Murtha, who's now mostly reduced to babbling, should resign this office. This is a critical moment for anyone concerned about Murtha's becoming a Human Gaffe Machine, someone making increasingly bizarre and contradictory statements that do great harm to the War on Terror.

http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=40DB5808-67E3-423F-8331-7BDCC77BC2DB

It's (Past) Time for Murtha to Resign

By FrontPage Magazine
FrontPageMagazine.com Monday, December 03, 2007

With one comment late last week, John Murtha argued eloquently for his own resignation.
In a video teleconference last Thursday, Murtha told his constituents, “I think the ‘surge’ is working.”

Jack Murtha is remembered as the main opponent of American involvement in Iraq, who argued not merely against the surge but for an immediate withdrawal while al-Zarqawi still treated Anbar province as the beachhead of a new, pan-Islamic Caliphate. The Abscam unindicted co-conspirator has demoralized the troops for years by claiming the war is “lost” and can never be “won militarily”; he has now vindicated the president and invalidated his unchanging, interminable counsel of withdrawal.

Every public official has the right to be wrong on an issue, even forcefully wrong – and to bear the responsibility for his stand. That’s what being a “Profile in Courage” is all about. As the most publicly visible advocate of American surrender, his endorsement of the surge he derided as hopeless and opposed even as it was bearing fruit just months ago amounts to an almost total self-repudiation. His continued, full-throated defense of American withdrawal from Vietnam, Beirut, and Somalia – the three reversals that convinced Osama bin Laden he could attack the Great Satan with impunity – indicate the Congressman is not merely passionately wrong but possibly uneducable.

This alone would demand for the resignation of an honorable man. The most compelling reason for John Murtha’s resignation, though, is that he is not an honorable man. Citing inside military sources, he publicly accused U.S. Marines of murdering innocent Iraqis “in cold blood.” (Unfortunately, Murtha was not referencing these informants when he said, “Look, these guys have lied to us so much, I've even lost confidence in the military”; he was referring to those honest enlisted men who said the surge was working.) Although all but one of the accused has been cleared of criminal charges, Murtha pointedly refused to apologize for painting American troops as pariahs, sadists, and maniacs – even as they face al-Qaeda demons who cook their opponents’ children alive.

Media coverage of his admission has been predictably disappointing. Not one of the three “major” networks covered the Congressman’s self-destructive comment. Certain aspects of the Murtha story were significantly absent from those media outlets that deigned to cover the story at all. Gone were references to Murtha as a “decorated war hero,” a war hawk of unassailable patriotism that could be counted on to make the well-being of his brothers-in-arms his lodestar. (The Associated Press cited this hagiography only when noting Murtha’s opposition to the war.)

The media did not report that such an admission proves the president’s military strategy has been an overwhelming success.

Only the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette dared to note:
About 711 Iraqi civilians have been killed or found dead in November, according to statistics compiled by The Associated Press. That figure compares with 2,155 deaths in May. U.S. forces also have seen a major decline in casualties. The military yesterday reported its 35th death in November, the lowest monthly number since March 2006. More than 120 troops died in May of this year, just as the troop surge was reaching its height.

Nor did “mainstream” media reporters place his comments into greater political context. None pointed out that the leadership of both houses of Congress wrote off the surge as an utter failure months ago, even before it had reached full-strength. Few noted the political implications of the admission. CNN revealed that Murtha “stunned” his colleagues. Only The Politico surmised, “This could be a huge problem for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA.) and other Democratic leaders, who are blocking approval of the full $200 billion being sought by President Bush for combat operations in Iraq in 2008.” It further quoted a “top House Democratic aide,” who responded: “This could be a real headache for us. Pelosi is going to be furious.”

This was the first and last media assessment that Murtha’s comments meant trouble for Congressional Democrats. The Washington Post’s Jonathan Weisman analyzed the statement, when asked, parrying that while “progress poses a huge dilemma for the Democrats…a new poll from the Pew Center found that Americans are far more optimistic about military efforts in Iraq and still back Democratic efforts to end the war. For Republicans, that is the dilemma.”

Instead, media outlets took the opportunity of Murtha’s “clarification” the next day to belittle those bold enough to mention this sea-change political development. CNN claimed “Republicans quickly seized Murtha’s comments.” The AP and Fox News, “GOP shill” that it is, also said Republicans had “pounced” on his words.

Although CNN’s John Roberts underscored the totality of this flip-flop, no media outlet has reported the complete hypocrisy embodied by Thursday’s statement. Local media reported, “Mr. Murtha, a Vietnam veteran who chairs the powerful House panel on defense spending, said the latest military successes aren't a surprise.” This is the same John Murtha who confidently asserted in March on Meet the Press “a surge just won’t work. And that’s what we believe, and, and I think, in the end, this is what you’ll see will happen.” In July, as the surge quelled violence and drove “insurgents” out of Iraq, Murtha insisted: “I think the surge has failed. I think there was no possibility it was going to work.”

Although he said repeatedly the military conflict “cannot be won military,” in his post-faux pas interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN, Osama’s Congressman said, “Militarily, sure, we can win.”

In his “clarification” – which even a usually complicit media dubbed “unusual” – Murtha further contradicted himself. “The fact remains that the war in Iraq cannot be won militarily, and that we must begin an orderly redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq as soon as practicable.” But, he added, “If you put more forces in, things will work out.” He concluded, “We can't win.” Not only can Murtha not craft a winning foreign strategy for America’s troops in wartime, he can’t voice his own vision of retreat without contradicting himself.

When two Brookings Institution antiwar liberals wrote Iraq was “A War We Just Might Win,” Murtha retorted, “They were there seven days…I dismiss it as rhetoric.” During his own short stint in the region, Murtha met U.S. troops in Kuwait and discovered to his shock, “They want to finish the job. But, on the other hand, they want to get home.” That would describe the aspirations of any enlisted man in any war in American history. It would also be exactly what Murtha’s plan would prevent.

Murtha is an ethically defective defeatist who has advocated the Waziristan [Pakistan] Party Line on foreign policy for more than two decades. He has unapologetically handed Osama bin Laden a propaganda coup while falsely maligning the Marines he claims to support. He has acknowledged the error of his most deeply-held policy position, which he now cannot even enunciate in anything resembling a coherent fashion.

U.S. Marines should have the time they need to finish their job. Jack Murtha should not.

BULLETIN TO MEDIA & DEMS: U.S. WINNING IN IRAQ!

I'll be writing over the next month -- generally on Mondays and Tuesdays -- about how Republican candidates and activists should frame arguments in seeking support. Republicans often fail to make statements that are meaningful and memorable, while Democrats are somewhat better at doing so. A column on the subject will appear tomorrow (Tuesday), and I urge you to read and comment. Thanks.

Here's my response to Christopher(see comments) regarding the column below: Christopher: The endless talk about what a "jerk" (supposedly) GWB is regarding Iraq is an exercise in pettiness and demagoguery. The War on Terror is going to cost many American lives, and there's nothing we can do about it other than transform ourselves into ostriches.

One problem is that the Dems (and too many Republicans) have no understanding of who our soldiers are and what motivates them (including courage and love of country). I realize that the American people are disturbed by the signs of casualties they see regularly on TV, but the alternative is to let al Qaeda train and mobilize in the Middle East so they can attack American "interests" (including the civilian population of the U.S.).

They've been here before, and they want nothing more than to kill people here again. Certainly, al Qaeda is not the only group causing problems in Iraq, but the defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq, which is very possible, would be a major blow to terrorists worldwide. We need to get across to voters that a vote for the Democrats is an exercise in denial that will not stand up to reality.

If we don't eradicate al Qaeda and other groups like them, they will eventually get their hands on weapons of mass destruction, and the results would be catastrophic. Anyone who "supports our troops" had better start supporting their efforts to kill or capture followers of bin Laden.

steve maloney, ambridge, pa


Monday, 3:50 p.m.: Octavia Nasser, a CNN Arab affairs expert, has listened to bin Laden's new audio tape, and she interprets it as a "sign of weakness" on the al Qaeda leader's part. She adds that he appears to see al Qaeda's effort in Iraq as "a failing proposition." Steve Maloney

Note: The following column is dedicated to former Army Captain Albert C. Labriola, a professor at Duquesne University, who was awarded the Silver Star for valor in Viet Nam and to Pvt. Track Palin, now at Ft. Benning and a fine representative of a family that symbolizes everything good about America.

Why did Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards say they couldn't "guarantee" U.S. troops would be out of Iraq by January, 2013 (that's four-and-a-quarter years from now)? One reason may be that it's finally dawned on them that the Petraeus Strategy is working -- and the U.S. is winning in Iraq.

The next word we hear from those three, also known as "See no evil . . . Hear no evil . . . and Evil," many be that they've really been For the War right from the start. We may yet see Hillary Clinton on Halloween outfitted in a military uniform.

Of course, the MSM "spin" on Iraq has been that everything is a mess -- and probably getting worse. As the War increasingly goes in the U.S.'s favor, the media is increasingly silent on the situation. The theme seems to be: "If you don't have anything bad to say, don't say anything at all."

For a sane view of the War -- and how America is winning big-time -- check out Jack Kelly's column in today's (Sunday, October 21) Pittsburgh Post-Gazette "Forum." You can find it at: http://post-gazette.com/forum. Gp there and scroll down to Jack's column and read both this week's and last week's pieces on Iraq.

Of course, some in the media, unable to find bad news, will make some up. Kelly quotes Qasim Zein of the McClatchey Newspapers, who says last week: "A drop in violence around Iraq has cut burials in the huge Wadi al Salam cemetery [in Najaf] by at least one-third in the past six months, and that's cut the pay of thousands of workers who make their living digging graves, washing corpses, or selling burial shrouds."

Maybe Moveon.org might take up the sad case of the burial workers? Or perhaps the people pushing the big hike in funding for SCHIP might advocate covering them under an enhanced health care plan?

Jack Kelly says the Washington Post and New York Times might consider publishing articles and Op Eds by people who actually know something about how the War is going. He says, "If the goal of the Washington Post were to inform its readers of the situation in Iraq now, one would think its editors would make more an effort to publish the views of soldiers and Marines who are serving in Iraq now." Don't hold your breath, Jack.

In fact, Kelly cites a Marine sergeant writing from Fallujah (!!!) to the milblogger "Blackfive": "Peace is breaking out all over the place, and no one knows what to do. I spent the day with [the regimental commander]. We rode straight through Fallujah without incident and down to Amiriyah to check on a police transition team. The TTs [transition teams] are quickly becoming the main effort."

If this kind of information comes as surprising news to you -- well, you've been derelict in your duty to read people like the on-scene milbloggers and Jack Kelly.

Check out the reports from a Baghdad from a once fiercely-contest neighborhood: "Once abandoned streets are now filled with families and entrepreneurs who continue to open new small businesses every week." Those are the words of battalion commander James Crider, speaking to super-milblogger (and former Special Forces solider) Michael Yon.

The political implications of the rapidly improving situation in Iraq are huge. We might even see the political version of a resurrection from the dead by President George W. Bush. Clearly, really good news from Iraq is not good news for the Democrats, including their presidential candidates.

If you truly want to know what's going on in Iraq, turn off CNN and CBS -- and ditch the Post and the Times. Then, go read Jack Kelly, Michael Yon, and David Petraeus. Also, because you still might be able to get good odds, bet the Republican canidate for President.

(And remember that one candidate for vice-president, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, has an 18-year-old son (Track Palin) training at Ft. Benning for service in the infantry.)

Sarah Palin Information: Last Wednesday, Adam Brickley, who founded the Draft Palin Movement was on Political Pistachio radio, a popular Internet-based program. Adam did an absolutely superb job of explaining why Sarah is the best possible candidate for the vice-presidency. If you go to Adam's site: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/ you can get a link to his "Pistachio" appearance.