Earlier today I received an e-mail from Senator Kerry showing the handful of Senators that voted with him on the Feingold-Kerry proposal to began removing troops from Iraq by July 1, 2007. I am pleased to note that one of my Senators, Dick Durbin, voted with them. Sadly, Senator Barack Obama didn't and, thus, continues to frustrate many of us who felt we were voting for a man of substance and integrity.

But what's more interesting is that I just received an e-mail from Senator Hillary Clinton touting her message YESTERDAY on the floor of the Senate to began withdrawing troops from Iraq. She said she supported the Levin amendment. But she didn't vote for the Feingold-Kerry one and the timing of her e-mail tells me that she's concerned that Kerry and Feingold placed out there for everyone to see the fact that she DIDN'T vote on the same issue TODAY.

Obama and Clinton are both disappointments. I wonder how things will pan out when they start to go after each other in their efforts to become either the first female or the first part-African-American president. This STRONG FEMINIST and CIVIL RIGHT PROPONENT wouldn't vote for either one at this point in time!

The only time the USA cut and ran was under President Ford. After more than 50,000 of the U.S.'s bravest died to keep us from Communism's "domino effect", Ford deserted our Vietnamese allies and ran.

"These colors" DO run! But only under a Republican President who was never elected. (Hmmm. Almost sounds familiar...)

And just as the Chicken Hawks had predicted for a decade, the dominoes fell and we were all enslaved under Communism. If only we had listened!! Had we stayed the course, Communism might have been eventually defeated.

But nooooooooo!! President Ford wouldn't listen, and the terrorists (Communists) won.

Final Score: Staying the Course - more than 50,000 U.S. soldiers dead. Cutting and Running - well, um, ....

The dems should using bold, aggressive language about the fact this administration is letting the next fix its problem.

What is his plan? Hammer the fact he is not fixing his own mess before he leads office and has offered nothing in the way of a solution on his watch.

Use the language of "duck and cover" on him to get at the issue.

Every time you mention the war, here's what you have tell the American public:

"You want statements like 'cut and run' or 'stay the course'? Those are the kind of statements that got us into this war in the first place. Bush actually believed he could stop terrorism by invading a Middle Eastern country. 'Shock and awe' indeed. You love those kinds of statements? Well, they bring you 2500+ American soldiers dead, uncounted civilians dead, and more terrorists than ever before.

This Iraq war was a HUGE miscalculation on Bush's part, and it is now a HUGE mess. We Democrats want to debate about a solution to get us out of this mess. There aren't going to be any catchy phrases. Catchy phrases are for the Republicans, who talk big and yet have turned out to be totally incompetent.

So, Americans, let's debate on how we can clean up the mess the Republicans have made for all of us. Let's talk about how to salvage Iraq and its citizens without causing yet more harm to them and to our soldiers. Withdraw the troops by 2007? 2008? We need to talk about it and create a plan. No catchy phrases from us."

*****

And for those smarty-pants who will immediately say, "You Democrats voted for the war, too." Here's the response:

"We voted to give Bush more powers. We trusted that he would use them wisely. He didn't. By God, he didn't. And no, we did not have the same intelligence info the White House had. We had the wonderful 'selective' intelligence which proved so wrong. Of course, that's par for the course for this White House."

Don't our elected representatives, the media, and far too many citizens remember the give and take free exchange of opposing, conflicting, co-existing, mutually supportive, intriguing, vexing, inspiring ideas? This salutory activity is one of Congress's primary reasons for being. And certainly it is the birthright and responsibility of every citizen. Good grief what a slogan nation this has become.

(and yes, I'm aware that, ironically, "slogan nation" is itself a slogan. Ah well.)

The U.S. needs to set a timetable for withdrawal that gives the Iraqi government time to set up its own defenses. From what I've been told, it generally takes anywhere from a year to 18 months for our armed forces to train an American teen-ager with no prior military experience and ship him or her to Iraq. It seems to me that if the Iraqis are serious about defending themselves, they should be able to have soldiers trained and ready to take over in the same amount of time. It's outrageous that there still aren't any Iraqi units that can stand on their own right now, after three years. They have an officer corps with combat experience left over from the war with Iran, so it's not really a question of inexperience with military matters. Now I'm sure those who support the war or oppose a timetable can list a number of reasons for the failure of Iraq to step up to the plate militarily. But those are just excuses. If Iraqis really want to control their destiny, they need to grab it and take responsibility for it. If they don't, for whatever reason, then they're on their own. It's not about "cutting and running." It's about not being held hostage to the agendas of Iraq's political/religious groups as they jockey for supremacy.

Once again, the Dems bicker with each other and look like fools. Who cares if they come up with a phantom policy statement, one that in all likelihood will never be implemented? Until November, Democrats should be saying--in unison: We are the party that believes the U.S. should get out of Iraq, while President Bush and the Republicans will have us there until 2009 and beyond. (Bush has said this.) If voters want costly, unending war, they should pick Republicans in November.

Debating the issue among themselves simply backs up the Repubs' claims that the Dems aren't unified.