It's Okay When Republicans Do It

Glenn Greenwald has a round-up of the reaction on the right to the U.S.-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. Clearly, Pres. Bush is one of the few, if not the only, Republican who thinks that Israel came out the winner in this conflict, but Glenn sees a larger point:

We have a rule in our country that "attacking the Commander-in-Chief during a time of war" helps The Terrorists and emboldens our enemies. Joe Lieberman put it this way: "in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril."

President Bush said during the campaign that John Kerry's criticisms of Iraq "can embolden an enemy." And this year he warned us: "In a time of war, we have a responsibility to show that whatever our political differences at home, our nation is united and determined to prevail." And last week, Ken Mehlman gave a speech in Cleveland and attacked what he said is a growing "defeatism," and then oh-so-cleverly remarked: "Today's Democrat Party has become the Defeat-ocrat Party."

In the wake of the Bush administration's engineering of the Israel-Lebanon U.N. resolution, it looks like the Commander-in-Chief has a lot of new enemies and the The Terrorists have a lot of new allies:

National Review Editors

In addition to winning in Lebanon, Iran has the upper hand both in Iraq and in the contest over whether it will be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. If current trends continue, the Bush administration's project in the Middle East will require the same sort of expedient we have just seen in the Israel-Lebanon conflict: a papering over of what is essentially a failure.

Dan Riehl

So, it turns out the lofty anti-terrorism rhetoric of Bush was little more than what some speech writer wrote to be read from a screen. . . . The man has looked over his head for much of his second term. Now, it's becoming more clear just how far. This will embolden the opposition in Iraq and could lead ultimately to the destruction of Israel.

Our war President has turned out to be a disgrace. At this point in world history, the Islamofascists look like they deserve to win. In fact, they might.

The Islamofascists deserve to win? Uhhhh... If this is treasonous when said by a liberal, is it not so when said by a neocon?

Does consistency mean anything?

Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer both said this weekend on Fox that Hezbollah won and Iran has been strengthened. Attacks on the Commander-in-Chief and proclamations of American defeat are ubiquitous - among the same group that insisted for the last five years that such attacks are dangerous and wrong and that talk of American defeat helps the terrorists.

Aren't terrorists going to be so happy to see that Americans are divided in this way? Doesn't it make us less safe for all of these people to be branding the U.S. as weak losers and to be glorifying the strength and power of our enemies? Don't these people realize that we're in a war and that weakening the Commander-in-Chief with such criticisms and declaring American defeat endangers all of us?