No trolling, just trying to figure out if your blanket statement has any validity at all.  Based on your response, I'm going to have to say NO.

So what?  How has this tangibly and negatively impacted the War on Terror or the war in Iraq?

seriously, I'm not being glib, I'm simply trying to understand this tired old attack.  If it's true, there must be specific examples you can point to, i.e. Pelosi said this and it led directly to this.

Help me out here.

What's your point?  Both sides attack with vitrol and name calling on the regular.  Cheney himself is notorious for calling people names and talking trash. 

Again, it seems it only matters when the Dems do it.  When your guys do it, you turn a blind eye.  I.E.  Schmidt's outrageously disrespectful attacks against Murtha.

I'm going to have to disagree entirely and say this is nothing but kool aid hype.

Why is it that dissenting talk from our politicians suddenly became wrong?  Aren't they elected to represent the views of their constituents and to do what they think is right?  If so, then how come we crucify them for doing their job?

Where was this outrage when DeLay said the same exact thing under Clinton?  I didn't hear anyone calling him a traitor or claiming that he was increasing the danger to our troops on the ground.  Just last week DeLay said this about Reid, "[saying that we've lost] in the time of war, with soldiers dying on the ground, announcing that we had lost the war, is very close to treasonous.”  This is essentially your claim, yet DeLay, as per usual, conveniently ignores what he said during Kosovo in 1999.

“[Milosevic is] stronger in Kosovo now than he was before the bombing. … The Serbian people are rallying around him like never before. He’s much stronger with his allies, Russians and others.” Clinton “has no plan for the end” and “recognizes that Milosevic will still be in power,” added DeLay. “The bombing was a mistake. … And this president ought to show some leadership and admit it, and come to some sort of negotiated end.”
(link)

It's almost word for word the exact same charges the Democrats are making against the Bush Admin.  So where was your outrage then?  Obviously there was none b/c you hated Clinton.  Fine.

The final point is that Harry Reid's opinion is one shared by a majority of American citizens, retired military officers, and many people involved in the world of foreign relations.  If he thinks that we are on the wrong course, than it is his duty as majority leader to speak up.  To remain silent would be to ignore the promise he made when he was sworn into office.

NL - Thanks for the post.  I disagree but it was nicely stated.

1)  So you complain when the Dems go to Syria but don't say a word when Republicans go (i.e. the 3 republican congressmen that went).  Doesn't this seem to be hypocritical?  Or do you think that those Republicans also made a bad decision?

2)  You're missing the entire point of a withdrawal date.  It's not like that date comes and all of our troops immediately leave the country.  It sets a time frame, a tangible date that we can strive for.  Let's try to get our goals done by this date, and then we can slowly begin bringing our troops home as the Iraqis stand up.  I don't see what is so outrageous about this.  The current open-ended committment in my mind simply allows the Iraqi government to continue suckling of the American teet while not doing anything for themselves.  Again, why should they try to control their country and stand up against the insurgents when American troops will do it for them?  At some point, the Iraqi government is going to have to become accountable for their country.  You wanted freedom, we gave it to you, figure out how to make it work.  The current problems in Iraq are between Iraqis and I feel that these are problems that they must work out amongst themselves.

3)  I understand how you can argue that dissent speech in America can possibly embolden the terrorists/enemies of America, but what is the alternative?  Are you proposing that we should stifle any speech that goes against the war?  There have been many problems with the war and our strategy, I don't think it's so outrageous for people to angry and to want to demand change.  It seems to me that if you had your way, America would behave more like Russia, beating protestors, stifling speech, and demanding lock step subservience to the government in power.  Seems pretty unAmerican to me..

4)  Now the democrats have completely undermined the morale at home?  It's entirely their fault?  Are you sure it wasn't the claims made in the run-up to the war that have subsequently turned out to be false (i.e. welcome us with open arms, WMDs, 9/11 - Iraq connections, etc. etc. etc.)  Or perhaps the ever increasing death toll of American troops that's hitting small town America the hardest?  Or could it be the continually escalating level of violence in Iraq?  Or the fact that there doesn't seem to be a comprehensive strategy (stay the course, no wait, escalte the troop presence).  Could it simply be that people are tired of American troops dying for 4 years for ambiguous goals?  To blame the dems for the decreasing morale is to entirely ignore the reality of the situation.  People don't like to see Americans die, especially when they're not sure what they are dying for.  This is simply human nature. 

5)  Love the personal attack at the end.  For a second there I thought you might be a cut above the rest of the posters on this site, but it seems the NB must engage in personal attacks ANYTIME people disagree with them.  It sure is hard to hide hatred.

Leon’s head just exploded.

It is sad that the Liberal mindset, Leon’s included, is that they actually hope for the military to do poorly, for the enemy to kill more troops, and for Democracy in the region to fail.  Why?  So they can perpetuate their Bush Hatred with what their irrational minds will consider supporting facts… something that they have not truly had all this time.

It’s sad that people in this country have so little disregard for our safety, our military and our way of life.

Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"