More attacks on dissent from media, GOP

A quick roundup of the latest attacks on dissent from the political world.

1. Media Matters reports that CNN's Michael Ware said a timeline "is only aiding the enemies" of America:

[A]nyone setting timeframes like that without real preconditions, anyone trying to put artificial deadlines upon this conflict is only aiding the enemies, so-called, of America, Al Qaeda and Iran. It allows them some leverage to know when to put the pressure on, to know that the clock is ticking, and to know where the pressure points are.

So, in terms of the battle day-to-day here, General Petraeus isn't looking more forward than five or six months. He's trying to make this surge work. But in terms of the broader strategic framework, it serves only America's enemies

2. MM also notes that CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck compared withdrawal supporters in Congress to suicide bombers:

Here's what I don't know. How do these people in Congress, Democrats and Republicans, who want to have it both ways, how do you sleep at night? How do you do it?

If your bill goes through, I hope you can't go to bed any single night without the images of body bags of our American soldiers coming off those planes. I hope they dance in your head every single night, because you will be just as responsible for their deaths as anyone who has ever strapped a bomb to their chest and screamed, "Allah Akbar."

3. Last but not least, two top Republicans called a timeline "a road map for the terrorists" that gives "encouragement to our enemies," respectively:

GOP leaders tried to keep the debate focused on Iraq policy, saying the House proposal would restrict commanders on the ground. "Arbitrary timelines are little more than a road map for the terrorists, a tool they'll use to plot their maneuvers against American men and women in uniform," Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said.

Other Republicans warned that the Democratic proposals are reckless, lending "encouragement to our enemies in this battle of wills," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), a leading Bush ally.

Comments

[Rob]

It is not an attack on dissent to state what should be obvious to anyone, that an effect of the determination to set a timetable for ending U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq is to encourage the so-called insurgents there. That may be a consequence that the proponents of a timetable feel is worth accepting because the goal of ending U.S. involvement outweighs it, but it doesn't mean the consequence doesn't exist.

Consider if a significant number of insurgents in Iraq were arguing for a timetable to end the insurgency. Wouldn't we conclude that our efforts there were succeeding and that we should continue to press them? Wouldn't we be encouraged?

Why would you imagine that the insurgents would have any different reaction to the efforts here to set a timetable? And why do you believe it is inappropriate for the media or the Republicans to say so?