Never let it be said that the Democrats are prepared to victory on the field of battle ahead of victory at the polls.

Bowing to the most extreme elements of the Democrat coalition, Senate Majority Leader Extremist Follower Harry Reid has announced that he will not allow the Senate to approve any money to ensure victory following our military's recent successes in Iraq.

Instead, he wants a commitment to a surrender date and an immediate move to withdraw troops.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Tuesday that Democrats won't approve more money for the Iraq war this year unless President Bush agrees to begin bringing troops home.

By the end of the week, the House and Senate planned to vote on a $50 billion measure for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill would require Bush to initiate troop withdrawals immediately with the goal of ending combat by December 2008.

If Bush vetoes the bill, "then the president won't get his $50 billion," Reid, D-Nev., told reporters at a Capitol Hill news conference.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., made a similar statement last week in a closed-door caucus meeting.

The tough rhetoric does not necessarily foretell another veto showdown with Bush on the war. Similar legislation has routinely fallen short of the 60 votes needed to overcome procedural hurdles in the Senate. It is possible the upcoming bill will sink, in which case Democrats would probably wait until next year to revisit the issue.

But their remarks reflect an emerging Democratic strategy on the war: Force congressional Republicans and Bush to accept a timetable for troop withdrawals, or turn Pentagon accounting processes into a bureaucratic nightmare.

What this amounts to is a demand by the Democrats for the setting of a timetable for US military defeat despite the steady advances that have occurred over the last year. The Democrats need their terrorist allies to win in Iraq if they are to win in November, 2008 at the polls in America. A military victory by the United States could, and likely would, harm the party's electoral prospects.

When can we begin to call this strategy treason?

Posted by: Greg at 11:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 363 words, total size 2 kb.