However, I did read Sen. Harry Reid’s rebuttal, posted on Huffington Post. Okay, so I just attempted to read it, but I didn’t get very far before my bullshit meter starting going off.
The first offending statement? Here it is:
“But, there's also no honor in sending our troops to battle without the armor, intelligence and planning they need to keep them safe.”
Um, Harry, I’d agree that sending troops to battle with inadequate armor, inaccurate intelligence, and imaginary planning is a bad idea, and may even be dishonorable, but it’s not because it threatens the troops’ safety. It’s just bad war-fighting. The troops, by definition, have a very unsafe job and a “safety first” mentality has no place on the battlefield.
What you should have said is “There’s no honor in sending our troops to battle without the armor, intelligence, and planning they need to achieve victory.” See? Not so wimpy and ignorant of basic military realities.
Then there was this:
“Democrats are unwavering in the fight against terrorism, but the Bush Administration has failed to propose real improvements to our policy in Iraq, while at the same time allowing Iran and North Korea to develop nuclear weapons.”
Good point about the Bush Administration’s inconsistent application of their own foreign policy, but Harry, this part? “Democrats are unwavering in the fight against terrorism.” Come on, bud. We all know that’s not true. When it comes to Iraq, the Democrats have wavered more than a rope bridge in a high wind. They were for it before they were against it, and they have yet to find any solid ground to stand on.
Reading Sen. Reid’s misfired missive will tell you that.