Why then does [the White House] insist on "staying the course" at a casualty[*] rate of more than one thousand Americans per month? The answer is breathtaking in its cynicism: so the retreat from Iraq happens on the next President's watch. That is why we still fight.

Yep, it's now all about George. Anyone who thinks that is too low, too mean, too despicable even for this bunch does not understand the meaning of the adjective "Rovian." Would they let thousands more young Americans get killed or wounded just so George W. does not have to face the consequences of his own folly? In a heartbeat.

Not that it’s going to help. When history finally lifts it leg on the Bush administration, it will wash all such tricks away, leaving only the hubris and the incompetence. Jeffrey Hart, who with Russell Kirk gone is probably the top intellectual in the conservative movement, has already written that George W. Bush is the worst President America ever had. I think the honor still belongs to the sainted Woodrow, but if Bush attacks Iran, he may yet earn the prize. That third and final act in the Bush tragicomedy is waiting in the wings. [link]
* Casualty, not fatality for those of you not familiar with proper jargon.

This is the work of William S. Lind, look him up.

He spends the next paragraph bashing the Dems "vacuity" in foreign policy. I agree. There are volumes of progressive views and ideas just waiting for some Dem to publicly consider them. But I think the real reason that the Dems have remained mum on the topic of alternative plans is that it is politically expedient; and that makes me sick, it's on the short list of problems with democracy, everything has a timetable. In our case it's a two-year timetable.

Rest assured that in the unlikely chance that Dems take either chamber next month, they will have plans. We've seen a variety of plans from this administration that you could drive a truck through. In truth, there is no perfect plan. So in Dem land they are thinking why give the Republicans ammo now? If they did they would find the holes and rip it to shreds. Instead the Dems will wait till after the election in hopes that the balance of power shifts enough to allow for an actual constructive debate on Iraq, Afghanistan, and -- more importantly -- the War on Terror. Not nonbinding resolutions and nationalism stoking rhetoric as we've gotten from the current Congress.

A note to Democrats: This wave of support will not last forever. If you fail to put forth one or a combination of the many options available to you, but instead hope to blame the previous guy as cover, then your 'wave' will crash down upon you harder than it has on the Republicans. And you'll deserve it.

I don’t think you’ll be this dense.