|
|
|
=======
|
| |
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NA
|
|
Jan 22nd, 2007, 11:44 AM
The left's blogoshere is the reason that "redeployment" has entered the political lexicon. The term means whatever you wish it to. We can redeploy troops to ther places in Iraq or Afghanistan, or we can redeploy them to Okinawa or back home. Redeployment is going to be a part of whatever we do in Iraq. Saying you are for that means nothing, but it has the potential to make anyone that hears it think you have a plan they'll agree with.
As long as the activist wing of the party remains happy with "redeployment" as a strategy for the war, she can ride the fence. I don't see the Republicans letting that happen after the primaries are over, though. I doubt disagreements on war strategy will be a factor in the Dem's primaries, though I think it'll be the focus of the Republican candidates during their scrimmage.
| |
__________________
mburbank~ Yes, okay, fine, I do know what you meant, but why is it not possible for you to get through a paragraph without making all the words cry?
How can someone who obviously thinks so much of their ideas have so little respect for expressing them? How can someone who so yearns to be taken seriously make so little effort?!
| |
|
|
Threaded Mode
