CRITICS

Warning: slanted political fulminating ahead!

The "diminishing our resolve" line is weird. It's as if Republicans think that the war on terrorism is a big game of chicken, like that scene in Rebel Without a Cause or maybe even the highway tractor-trailer near disaster scene toward the beginning of Footloose. And if we only make sure that there are no voices of dissent, then we will steel our will and the enemy will blink first, and drive off the cliff and die in a flaming wreck. Therefore, in this line of argument, dissent from Democrats is harming the war on terrorism -- by diminishing our "resolve" and our ability to convince the enemy that we will not blink first -- and will increase the likelihood of failure and further carnage.

I don't want to put too fine a point on it, but to me it sounds an awful lot like these Republicans and their allies "hate our freedom."

It may very well be the case that a society with no internal divisions can display militaristic resolve at the right moments. So what? That is not the kind of society that we have, nor is it the kind that I, at least, want to live in.

It is certainly within the bounds of democratic politics for Republicans to accuse Democrats of undermining the war effort. And Democrats have an excellent response: we supported you, but you snowed us, and, besides, now you sound like propagandists rather than democratic political leaders.

MORE: Wait a minute. Chicken is about avoiding the flaming wreck at the last possible moment. So if I remember Rebel Without a Cause right, the game of chicken went awry because someone misjudged how late they could turn away and still avoid the cliff. Plus, the game of chicken works because you rely on the opponent's drive for self-preservation.

The main point here is that it's not a game of chicken, however you define the game. If we're going to be in this for the long haul -- and we should be -- then what will be necessary is less an attempt to shut down voices of dissent by claiming that they diminish our "resolve," and more an attempt to convince opponents that policies are right and reasonable. You can't do that by lying about costs of reconstruction, on the one hand, and by putting potentially fatal long-term fiscal pressures on your opponent's domestic priorites, on the other. That's a bullying tactic. And it should be no surprise if Democrats attempt to push back on the issues that they care about.