Republicans spend like six whole years F’ING up the country. Literally. They get booted in the election, then they sit back and screw with, and laugh at, the Dems as they struggle pathetically to fix the mess. It’s classic.

I’m so happy to be an independant.

you say the Democrats play the blame game and don’t have a viable solution for Iraq.

With that you are right, of course.

But does that not also apply to the Republicans?

Why not attack both sides, when your critique attacks playing the blame game and lack of a viable policy for Iraq?

The blame game is inevitable - as long as you are willing to concede that there has to be responsibility and accountability in politics. Those who led the USA into the predicament should be held to account.

But it is NOT ONLY the blame game.

Almost 70% of the US voters do back now what the Democrats presented to the Senate. Why should the Democrats not demand the Republican Senators to vote pro or against partial withdrawal? That is legitimate politics, I dare say.

The Democrats’ proposal certainly is not about “Dunkirk evacuation”. There is not so much pressure on the “enduring bases” that this might become necessary soon. It is about a partial withdrawal, and a new strategy. Democrat Senators, different to part of their own basis, do not opt in favour of a complete withdrawal - at least not right now.

There is not any really good solution to the Iraq desaster. Most Americans now - and me and you, too - would prefer one or other version of the Baker-Hamilton plan. Some Republican Senators do so, too. So there might be a majority, 60 or more votes in the Senate for that option.

Why are these Republicans not willing to allow a majority vote in the Senate?

Couple of problems here. Evidently, Maliki does not agree that catastrophe will ensue if US soldiers leave. He says, go any time. Most Iraqis agree. A number of analysts have outlined likely scenarios after departure that do not spell disaster, unless you consider Halliburton’s prospects an important factor. The other is that the author is so persuaded of the obvious rationality of his own position that no reason for opposing it can exist save hatred for George Bush. Why hate Bush? He is just one more empty suit representative of his class. He may be a particularly obnoxious one, but they’d throw up another one if he were not available. Take Giuliani, or Romney, say. Or Hillary Clinton, for that matter. The problem is not personal animus against W. It is the policy. Yawl need to realize that.

And I don’t get it…With almost 70% of this country against this war, a Democratic attempt to end it is pandering to it’s “base”

qed, 70% of the country = the Democratic party’s base. no wonder Republicans are scared. that’s not even counting swing voters or those who dont even vote in the primaries.