Tom DeLay thinks Democrats’ criticism of the war borders, literally, on treason.
In an interview with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review editorial board yesterday, former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) accused Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) of “getting very, very close to treason” by opposing the war in Iraq. When a member of the editorial board noted that treason is a “pretty serious charge,” DeLay shot back, “And I’m serious about it.” He added that he had looked up the definition on his way to the interview (probably a good idea), and it meant “the betrayal of trust.”
DeLay specifically attacks Reid, saying that “in the time of war, with soldiers dying on the ground, announcing that we had lost the war, is very close to treasonous.”
TP noted that “none of this should come as a surprise. DeLay, who is currently under criminal indictment for money laundering and criminal conspiracy, has a long history of attacking the patriotism of progressives.”
That’s true, but let’s take a moment to delve into what, exactly, amounts to treason.
Borrowing liberally from Slate’s William Saletan, let’s provide some context for DeLay’s concerns.
If you’re sympathetic to a far-right worldview, you can probably muster some understanding for the former Majority Leader throwing around words like “treason.” After all, Harry Reid called the war in Iraq a “quagmire” and compared it to Vietnam. He said it would “drag on” indefinitely, costing billions. He accused the president of failing to specify how long our troops would have to stay, and he urged the administration to withdraw. When “the body bags start coming home,” Reid said, it’s time to cut our losses.
Reid kept going, talking about the need for peace. “The White House has bombed its way around the globe,” he sneered. “International respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly.” As for the current war plan, Reid complained that “no one wants us to be there” and that the president’s crusade “has harmed [our] standing in the world.”
And given the climate, I suppose Reid was pushing his luck when he urged Congress to de-fund the war and “pull out the forces we now have in the region.” What’s worse, Reid basically made the United States look like the bad guy. Once a U.S.-led coalition “starts meddling in the internal affairs of sovereign nations, where does it stop?” Reid asked. He charged that we were “starting to resemble a power-hungry imperialist army” and portrayed our mission as an “occupation by foreigners.”
Are all of these comments harsh? Do they undermine the troops while they’re in harm’s way? Do they amount, literally, to “treason”?
Before our friends on the right answer these questions, they should keep one minor detail in mind: all of these quotes I attributed to Harry Reid weren’t said by Reid at all — they came from Tom DeLay, on the House floor, about President Clinton’s war in Kosovo. It never occurred to him then, as it does now, that criticizing a war and questioning a military campaign is an unpatriotic attack on the country and its military.
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quite true.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks