Dean Backpedals On “We Can’t Win” Statement
Hmm...
Cherry-picked, eh? Here's an excerpt from the original statement:
That sounds pretty clear to me, but lets give it some context. Here's a link to the full audio of Dean's statements. Even in context, Dean's meaning is clear. He is saying that we must withdraw because we're going to lose. There's no other way to interpret it.
And the fact that he's backing off it now shows just how bankrupt his position is. He's not trying to take a principled stance on Iraq, he's not calling on the U.S. to do the right thing in Iraq, he's trying to say the right things to further his party's political agenda. Just like every other Democrat out there. If there were no MoveOn/Cindy Sheehan/Michael Moore/International A.N.W.S.E.R. base in the Democrat party to contend with these people would probably be singing a different tune. But the truth of the matter is that they cannot get elected without that base. So they pander to it and as a result end up pushing a position that is exactly as clear as mud.
WASHINGTON Dec 8, 2005 %u2014 Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean said Thursday his assertion that the United States cannot win the war in Iraq was reported "a little out of context," saying Democrats believe a new U.S. strategy is needed to succeed there.
Seeking to clarify a statement in a Texas radio interview that Republicans harshly assailed and some Democrats questioned, Dean said, "They kind of cheery-picked that one the same way the president cherry-picked the intelligence going into Iraq."
Cherry-picked, eh? Here's an excerpt from the original statement:
Democratic Chairman Howard Dean on Monday likened the war in Iraq to Vietnam and said, %u201CThe idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong,%u201D comments that drew immediate fire from Republicans.
That sounds pretty clear to me, but lets give it some context. Here's a link to the full audio of Dean's statements. Even in context, Dean's meaning is clear. He is saying that we must withdraw because we're going to lose. There's no other way to interpret it.
And the fact that he's backing off it now shows just how bankrupt his position is. He's not trying to take a principled stance on Iraq, he's not calling on the U.S. to do the right thing in Iraq, he's trying to say the right things to further his party's political agenda. Just like every other Democrat out there. If there were no MoveOn/Cindy Sheehan/Michael Moore/International A.N.W.S.E.R. base in the Democrat party to contend with these people would probably be singing a different tune. But the truth of the matter is that they cannot get elected without that base. So they pander to it and as a result end up pushing a position that is exactly as clear as mud.
Jack Lee
richNJ
QueenZel
Proof
Greg
robert108
Kevin
Gene
