RWNH sums up the political climate and calculus of the week quite accurately:
Well, it didn't take one one of the "liberals" (Drongo) who hangs out at the site long at all to pose a question, one which in his mind has most likely already been answered along the lines of "cut and run."
What we have seen this past week with the Petraeus testimony and the Bush speech is that facts don’t matter as much as political calculation with regards to the war. No one has been swayed by anything anyone has said about what is happening in Iraq. And no one is likely to be affected in the future by any arguments or even facts on the ground coming out of that country. Everyone’s mind appears to be made up except for a handful of GOP Senators and Congressmen who know what they believe about the war but have not quite taken the step of abandoning the President yet. That may change by January when the funding issue is revisited. Until then, Petreaus gets to continue his good work, hoping to build upon his small successes while Bush can try to push a reluctant Iraqi government toward at least the appearance of reconciliation.
We have been at this point in the Iraq debate for close to two years and nothing has changed. I suppose that there is some benefit of reiterating the same positions over and over, if only to remind us of how very far apart we are on this and other issues. Perhaps that reminder will spur us to greater efforts to bridge the gap between the two sides so that we can find an honorable way out of Iraq without leaving behind a Middle East blood bath but I’m doubting it.
For that to happen, someone would have to make the first move. And as it stands now, both sides are too proud, too rigid to make that happen.
What sort of first move would you suggest?
To which I replied:
First move would be for the Democrats to stop making political hay out of the specter of failure in Iraq. It boggles the mind such a despicable tactic would be employed at a time when U.S. forces are in harm's way, no less by people who continually catapult the propaganda about how they "support the troops" and Republicans/conservatives don't.
Of course the moonbats who continue to insist "Bush is not my president" or "it's Bush's war, not mine" are still out of their hateful, illogical, BDS-addled minds, but it's hard to blame them completely when a bipartisan action by Congress authorized the war, yet now one of those parties is attempting to disavow ownership of it after the going got tough and public approval waned.
Congressional Democrats could be showing backbone and leadership, standing strong in the face of a fickle, war-weary public and making the best of a bad situation they helped to initiate, but instead these hypocritical cowards are preemptively declaring an on-going mission to be "a failure" on the one hand, while continuing to fund it on the other, and somehow being allowed by their supporters to reconcile this obviously self-serving and conflicted behavior under the false pretense "Bush lied us into war" in the first place.