Conservative Bloggers Desperate?

A new antiwar ad by MoveOn.org urging redeployment of American troops out of Iraq has conservatives up in arms, with James Taranto of OpinionJournal.com (link here) and video blogger Political Teen (video here) both criticizing the video because of one still shot of troops preparing for a meal in Iraq. It turns out the picture -- shown while a narrator says "A hundred and fifty thousand American men and women are stuck in Iraq" -- is actually of British troops, not American troops.

While this certainly could be seen as a little embarassing for the makers of the video, it is unclear exactly what Taranto and the Political Teen are trying to prove... that we actually don't have troops in Iraq? That there are more British troops than American troops? The fact is that most Americans will not know the difference when they view the video, and that even if the ad showed Iraqis, that would not change the fact that there are American troops fighting and dying in Iraq, many of whom would like to come home.

It seems with things not going exactly their way lately, Republican hawks are resorting to all sorts of desperate nitpicking and childish games to score political points.

Another example of this desperate behavior is the video, also from Political Teen, in which former Congressman JC Watts "pointed out Colmes' Liberal, Anti-Bush views" (video here). In fact, Colmes says that Bush presented nothing new in his speech on Wednesday, and Watts responds with a completely irrelevant zinger: "Well, then, Alan, the reason you didn’t hear anything from the President today is because you listened to the President to respond to him as opposed to listening to what he’s saying."

While it might be true that Colmes was more interested in responding to Bush than listening to him, his point stood that Bush in fact did not present anything new. By failing to give any examples of anything new Bush presented, Watts concedes this much. When Colmes pressed the question by asking again what Bush said that was new other than displaying signs that said "victory", Watts responded by not answering the question, and throwing out a weak rhetorical jab:

"Alan, it’s amazing you refuse to accept the fact that Saddam Hussein, the biggest weapon of mass destruction, is no longer in power, that he is being tried in a — under the judicial system that’s in place in Iraq." (my emphasis)

This plainly has nothing to do with whether or not Bush presented any new tactics for the war in Iraq, also happens to be painfully cheesy. If this is the type of rhetorical and political "victory" being touted by Bush apologists -- much akin to their "victory" in Iraq -- these are dark days for the Republicans indeed.