Prosecute the torture.

November 22, 2005

Ruth Ann Dailey wants to Surrender to the Terrorists!

I noticed something very interesting in her most recent column. In between attacks on "media bias" and a political deconstruction of Congressman Murtha, Ms Dailey wrote this:
I happen to think that it's time to begin slowly withdrawing troops from Iraq and "incentivizing" democracy-minded Iraqis to undertake their own governance and security...
Is she really advocating troop withdrawal?

If a democrat (let's say a decorated Vietnam war veteran) were to propose the same thing, wouldn't the right side of the blogosphere be calling that person a traitor for advocating surrender?

Hmmmm

UPDATE: This morning, when I posted this I forgot to link it back to Ruth Ann Dailey's column. I fixed it this evening.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

"If a democrat (let's say a decorated Vietnam war veteran) were to propose the same thing, wouldn't the right side of the blogosphere be calling that person a traitor for advocating surrender?"

That's not the definition of a traitor, and I can see where you're attempting to go at this, but failing miserably. You want to talk about traitors? How about the many members of your political party undermining our war efforts in Iraq (Ted*hic*Kennedy comes to mind)? How about the countless military men and women returning from Iraq, appalled at what they're seeing here, especially appalled at the media who fails to report on all the good things that are taking place in Iraq. Nope, we won't hear about those things, only the bad things because hey, if they report on the good things happening in Iraq, then it'll make Bush look good, and they can't have that. After all, it doesn't match their political agenda, does it? You want to talk about traitors? How about Jane Fonda and her coddling the enemy in Vietnam? Traitors you say? You want to talk about traitors? Feh.