More Stupid News People

When Will They Learn?

In Congressional Treason, I have already written about John Murtha’s stance on the immediate pullout of our troops from Iraq. I followed up on the story in Winning The Battle addressing a non-binding Republican resolution, honoring Murtha's demand for an immediate pullout, which was defeated in the House by 403-3.

You do realize that the real story here isn’t really Murtha’s call for a troop withdrawal--that’s the standard line these days from Democrats like John sKerry, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid.

The real story here is that ex-marine John Murtha hasn’t changed his position on troop deployments at all. Murtha actually has a long history of calling for our troops to “cut and run” as soon as we see the first casualties, and with last week’s announcement he is only continuing his long held position.

But that’s not what the mainstream media will tell you, however.

The media wants you to believe that Murtha is a “Hawk” and a warmonger, and because he is an EX-MARINE, his call for the immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq is some kind of giant newsworthy epiphany for Murtha—a major shift in his position of which we should all take notice.

They think that President Bush and the American people should listen to Murtha’s revelations.

Bull hockey.

Shailagh Murray’s (I didn’t make that first name up) story in today’s Washington Post continues the lies and insanity, particularly in the headline and the first four paragraphs.

The About-Face of a Hawkish Democrat
Murtha, With Many Military Connections, Moves From Voting for War to Urging Troop Withdrawal
By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff WriterFriday, November 25, 2005; Page A02

Of all the Democrats calling for an end to the Iraq war, Rep. John P. Murtha is an anomaly. Unlike Sens. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and Russell Feingold (Wis.), he doesn't want to be president. He's no liberal, like his House colleagues Dennis J. Kucinich (Ohio) and Maxine Waters (Calif.). He's certainly the only one to call Vice President Cheney a friend.

A man of gruff familiarity -- most colleagues find it more natural to call him "Murtha" than "Jack" -- has been representing his Pennsylvania district for 16 terms, rising to become the senior Democrat on the House Appropriations panel's defense subcommittee. For that perch, he became known for his opposition to defense cuts and his willingness to send troops into battle -- and even to draft them, if necessary. He was the first Vietnam veteran elected to Congress, and has fashioned a reputation as the Democrats' soldier-legislator -- a John McCain type without swagger or upward ambition. He generally prefers the shadows of Capitol Hill to the spotlight -- though that changed dramatically in recent days.

Last week, as Congress was preparing to leave town for a two-week Thanksgiving break, Murtha told a gathering of colleagues and, later, reporters that -- although he had voted in favor of the resolution authorizing the Iraq invasion -- he now wants American troops withdrawn immediately. "The U.S. cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily," Murtha said. "It is time to bring them home."

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) predicted that Murtha's statement would become a "watershed event for our caucus, for our Congress and for our country." The burly 73-year-old lawmaker ignited a news blitz, and Republicans scrambled to respond. House GOP leaders hastily drew up a watered-down version of Murtha's withdrawal resolution, and made Republican lawmakers remain in town for a bitter and emotional Friday night session to vote it down.

This follows an earlier Washington Post story by Liz Sidoti:

Hawkish Democrat Calls for Iraq Pullout
By LIZ SIDOTI
The Associated PressThursday, November 17, 2005; 11:14 PM

WASHINGTON -- One of Congress' most hawkish and influential Democrats called Thursday for an immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, sparking bitter and personal salvos from both sides in a growing Capitol Hill uproar over President Bush's war policies.
"It's time to bring them home," said Rep. John Murtha, a decorated Vietnam combat veteran, choking back tears during remarks to reporters. "Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty."

Notice anything consistent in the headlines?

All of that sounds wonderful if it were true and it was the ENTIRE story, but it’s not.

Why can’t Miss Murray and Miss Sidoti even bother to Google “John Murtha” and see what information pops up, rather than just accepting the line that he’s some kind of “Hawk?” A line supplied by, of all places, the Democrats?

Apparently they didn't, because they are either lazy, STUPID, or just partisan liars--you decide.

I, your trusty Blogger, did do some “Googling” this morning, and here is what I found out about John Murtha's prior record on supporting military conflicts as a Congressman:

On October 9, 2002, Murtha’s Congressional Website had this statement:

WASHINGTON, DC, October 9, 2002 -- Congressman John Murtha today said he would vote for the resolution authorizing military force against Iraq despite a number of serious reservations.

Murtha said, “Obviously we have reason to be concerned about Saddam Hussein -- there’s no question that he’s a real threat to us and we need to make sure he’s not developing nuclear, chemical or biological weapons to use against us or against other nations in the Middle East. We also need to make sure that Iraq does not resume Afghanistan’s former role as the host nation for terrorist training camps.

I'm SO relieved...John Murtha supported the war, BEFORE it started, but now he doesn’t.

Sound familiar? (can you say John sKerry?)

And this little tidbit, again from a November 17, 2005 press release on his own website:

I said over a year ago, and now the military and the Administration agrees, Iraq can not be won “militarily.” I said two years ago, the key to progress in Iraq is to Iraqitize, Internationalize and Energize. I believe the same today. But I have concluded that the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq is impeding this progress.

Murtha admits that he's been saying for an ENTIRE YEAR that the war in Iraq "can not be won militarily..."

Hummmmmmm...but I thought this was a RECENT revelation...

It seems that Murtha has exhibited a weak stomach for troop deployments previously and has actually done this type of thing before.

In 1993 he took credit for urging President Clinton to pull US troops out of Somolia in an interview on NBC’s Today show:

After terrorists attacked U.S. troops in Mogadishu, Somalia 12 years ago, anti-Iraq war Democrat, Rep. John Murtha urged then-President Clinton to begin a complete pullout of U.S. troops from the region.

Clinton took the advice and ordered the withdrawal - a decision that Osama bin Laden would later credit with emboldening his terrorist fighters and encouraging him to mount further attacks against the U.S.

"Our welcome has been worn out," Rep Murtha told NBC's "Today" show in Sept. 1993, a month after 4 U.S. Military Police had been killed in Somalia by a remote-detonated land mine.

The Pennsylvania Democrat announced that President Clinton had been "listening to our suggestions. And I think you'll see him move those troops out very quickly

So I ask you, what's the big deal here?

With "Hawks" like this, who needs "Doves" and other pacifists?

Isn’t Murtha just continuing along the path of expecting resounding victory and zero casualties from the military actions that he initially supports, but as soon as things go less than perfectly he's all for turning tail and running?

And why does the media continue to hype Murtha as a traditional pro-war “hawk?”

I say that it's because if Murtha made his statements and proposed his resolutions for an immediate pullout from Iraq and IF the truth was known, his calls would just be another example of standard liberal Democratic whining about the war.

I say we just add him to the Democratic Dean's list--Howard Dean's list, that is...