A Response to Harry Reid

Over at Huffpo, Senate Maj Leader Harry Reid has this post regarding the Democrats' resolution to 'Bring home the troops:'

"Democrats believe, as does an overwhelming majority of the American people, that President Bush needs to change course in Iraq. We can't stay in Iraq forever. The question becomes whether we'll continue to follow the president's failed strategy or whether we work to change course.


Will the Senate sit silent, or will we bring stability to Iraq and bring our troops home from a protracted civil war?

Democrats have always been unified on these principles.


The mission in Iraq has changed and, therefore, so must U.S. policy change. Troops should not be policing a civil war. The current conflict in Iraq requires a political solution.

Listen to what General Petraeus said today from Iraq: "The war cannot be won militarily. It can only be won politically."


We further believe that Iraq must take responsibility for its own future, and our troops should begin to come home.

That's why, yesterday, I'm introducing a joint resolution calling for the president to change course and bring stability to Iraq by beginning a phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq in 120 days, with the goal of redeploying combat forces from Iraq by the end of March of next year.


A limited number of troops would remain for the purposes of force protection, training and equipping the Iraqi troops, and counterterrorism activities.

Truly changing course in Iraq will require Republican cooperation and support. So far, Republicans have chosen to greenlight the escalation.


Hopefully, Senate Republicans will join the American people in opposing the president's flawed policies in Iraq. They must put doing the right thing above protecting the president."

This has about the same substance and is about as sincere as one of Bush's State of the Union addresses. Now I hate criticizing Democrat leadership. It's like scolding my Mother, and just about as futile, but it needs to be said. In this memo Reid is, at the least, disingenuous and, at most, deceitful. As I talked about here the Democrat resolution isn't a call strictly to pull troops from Iraq--as the American people want. The resolution includes several methods to keep our troops there leaving their presence in the region ultimately in the president's hands.

Is it just me or did I hear the word "blank check" echoing in the distance?

As a way to tame the Iraq conflict the resolution might work--if the goal is to tame and not end Bush's war. You tell us its the latter, but the facts point to the former. You can't have it both ways.

You're doing your party and your constituents a disservice when you try to play both sides of the aisle like this. Since Clinton people have accused the Democrats of not standing for anything, and yet even when a huge majority of Americans LOUDLY oppose our presence in Iraq you continue to talk vague and empty rhetoric. The girl at the end of the bar just tossed her panties in your face, but you're still nursing your drink. Either stand as the opposition party or the Democrats will lose whatever gains they made in the 2006 elections. And you don't need to be Karl Rove to figure that out.