California Conservative

“Americans have a long and honorable tradition of taking exception with their governments, even during wartime. After Mr. Bush’s speech, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid described Iraq policy as ‘adrift, disconnected from the reality on the ground and in need of major mid-course corrections.’ Surely anyone offering such a biting critique won’t object if we examine precisely what ‘corrections’ the loyal opposition has in mind.”

Let’s see: As best we can tell, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s main suggestion Tuesday night was that we spend more on veterans benefits. Former General Wesley Clark–a man who should have something valuable to say on the subject of waging modern war (he wrote a book with that title)–lamented that Iraq has become a recruiting and training ground for terrorists, as if Abu Musab al-Zarqawi only entered his current profession in April 2003. And as if jihadists aren’t also still hitting us in Afghanistan, which is a campaign General Clark says he supports.

By the logic of Mr. Clark’s critique, the U.S. should withdraw from Iraq immediately because the terrorists will then leave us alone. But when Fox’s Brit Hume pursued the question, Mr. Clark backed away. As for helpful policy alternatives, we didn’t hear any.

And you won’t. Democrats don’t have strategy for Iraq, they only offer negative rhetoric — hoping for Bush’s failure. Truth is: the only way they can look good is by making him look bad, regardless of damage it’s doing to our troops and our nation’s reputation. Perhaps that defines the DNC strategy.

The Wall Street Journal has the editorial.

RELATED:
Delivering The Predictable: Democrats
Criticize Bush’s Speech on Iraq