Dems in Congress: Surrender in 120 days!

Not wanting to take the chance that the surge will be successful come Patraeus' upcoming September 08 report, the dems (and 4 RINOs) in the U.S. House thought they'd give Al Qaeda and other types a bit more encouragement as they take aim at our soldiers and innocent Iraqis:

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Iraqi government is achieving only spotty military and political progress, the Bush administration conceded Thursday in an assessment that war critics quickly seized on as confirmation of their dire warnings. Within hours, the House voted to withdraw U.S. troops by spring.

The House measure passed 223-201 in the Democratic-controlled chamber despite a veto threat from President Bush, who has ruled out any change in war policy before September.

"The security situation in Iraq remains complex and extremely challenging," the administration report concluded. The economic picture is uneven, it added, and the government has not yet enacted vital political reconciliation legislation.

As many as 80 suicide bombers per month cross into the country from Syria, said the interim assessment, which is to be followed by a fuller accounting in September from Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in the region.

"I believe we can succeed in Iraq, and I know we must," Bush said at a White House news conference at which he stressed the interim nature of the report.

Describing a document produced by his administration at Congress' insistence, he said there was satisfactory progress by the Iraqi government toward meeting eight of 18 so-called benchmarks, unsatisfactory progress on eight more and mixed results on the others.

To his critics—including an increasing number of Republicans—he said bluntly, "I don't think Congress ought to be running the war. I think they ought to be funding the troops."

Democrats saw it differently.

A few hours after Bush's remarks, Democratic leaders engineered passage of legislation requiring the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops to begin within 120 days, and to be completed by April 1, 2008. The measure envisions a limited residual force to train Iraqis, protect U.S. assets and fight al-Qaida and other terrorists.

The vote generally followed party lines: 219 Democrats and four Republicans in favor, and 191 Republicans and 10 Democrats opposed.

"The report makes clear that not even the White House can conclude there has been significant progress," said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D- Calif.

To Bush and others who seek more time for the administration's policy to work, she said, "We have already waited too long."

Republicans sided with Bush—at least for now. The bill "undermines Gen. Petraeus, undermines the mission he has to make America and Iraq safe," said the House GOP leader, Rep. John Boehner of Ohio. "What we have here is not leadership, it's negligence."

The 25-page administration report was issued in the fifth year of a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,600 U.S. troops and is costing U.S. taxpayers an estimated $10 billion a month.

Bush announced last winter he was ordering thousands of additional troops to the war zone, but the full complement has only arrived in recent weeks. "The full surge in this respect has only just begun," the report said.

It warned of "tough fighting" during the summer as U.S. and Iraqi forces "seek to seize the initiative from early gains and shape conditions of longer-term stabilization."

The president sampled the report at his nationally televised session with reporters.

"Iraqis have provided the three brigades they promised for operations in and around Baghdad. And the Iraqi government is spending nearly $7.3 billion from its own funds this year to train, equip and modernize its forces," he said.

But in other areas, he added, they "have much more work to do. For example, they've not done enough to prepare for local elections or pass a law to share oil revenues."

Well, let's see here, shall we? What did Nancy Pelosi deliver in the first 100 hours of the democrat-controlled congress? For that matter, what did Nancy Pelosi deliver in the first six months of the democrat controlled congress? Was it the long-awaited ethics reform? Was it the long-awaited end to porkbarrel earmarks? C'mon, Pelosi--inquiring minds want to know!!

Yet you have the gall to expect a vastly superior rate of progress to be made in a fledgling democracy, when you yourself couldn't run a one-car funeral?


The amount of hypocrisy present in the democrat-controlled congress is a sight to behold-- if one wants to puke.