For shame

Sunday, January 14, 2007
The Democratic Party

No blood for oil. Blood for political positioning, however, seems a fair exchange.


Via Ace

Given the choice:

A} Stabilizing Iraq and letting the Republicans get some of the credit.

B} Seeing more die and Republicans get the blame.

Which would the Democrats prefer?

3 comments:

Buddy Larsen said...

"No blood for oil, but lots of blood for my politics!"

Sounds to me like a good lefty slogan, alright!

David Thomson said...

The Democrats remain the unserious political party. Power is everything. What will they do with it? They don't really know. That is something to worry about down the road. They are supposedly more virtuous and intelligent than the Republicans---and should be running everything. The zeitgeist is on their side.

truepeers said...

The whole left-liberal philosophy right now depends on assumptions of Western or White Guilt, that what is normal (e.g. John Roberts' family portrait) is a sign of an oppressive construct that excludes and creates victims. This philosophy positively encourages people to appear as victims of the normal; it encourages blood-shedding to prove the political posture, to get in the game, as, e.g., Green Helmet guy in Lebanon showed last summer by displaying to the Western media the Hezbollah human shields and other sacrificial lambs. Quite simply: human sacrifice is now needed to prove the virtue of the left's politics. No blood for White Guilt!