This is exactly the kind of ridiculousness that so irritated me just last week.
So, that bastion of pinko commies, the editorial board of the New York Times, began a big ol' Sunday editorial with a searing indictment of President Bush:
As America’s military experience in Iraq grows ever more nightmarish, it is becoming clear that President Bush’s strategy comes down to this: Keep holding to a failing course for the next 29 months and leave it to the next administration to clean up the mess.Hear, hear! Couldn't agree more. So they're going to follow this up with a call for President Bush to finally present a plan, right? They're going to excoriate the lack of information and the dearth of rational thought on the part of war-planners in the White House and DoD and the Republican Congress, I bet, because, y'know, those are the guys in power, the ones responsible for foreign policy and the war.
Wait, what's that you say? It's not the fault of people in power, the ones who control every single branch of the government? It's really the fault of . . . Democrats??
With the Republican majority in Congress moving in perpetual lock step behind the White House, the job of pressing the issue has been dumped in the laps of the Democrats. Unfortunately, they have their own version of reality avoidance. It involves pretending that the nightmare can be ended by adopting a timetable for a phased withdrawal of American troops.This is the so-called "liberal media." I will now light myself on fire.
The Times helpfully explains, "The only responsible way out of Iraq involves all the things President Bush refused to consider on the way in." That's simply incorrect. The only responsible way out of Iraq involves all the things President Bush still refuses to consider! The choice isn't between the New York Times Fantasy Plan That Dems Should Make Happen and the Bush Incompetence Initiative, it's between letting Bush continue to ruin everything and trying to bring home the troops so he can't do quite so much damage, both to the military (and its members, obviously) and to Iraq. Dems could propose plans until they're blue in the face, but, and I'm typing very slowly here so Very Smart Editorialists can understand, Bush . . . won't . . . listen . . . to . . . Democrats.
Red plan, blue plan, old plan, new plan; it doesn't matter. President Bush will listen to about three people, and their little group will continue to ruin everything it touches. A Democratic Congress might be able to stem the tide through oversight, hearings, and the like, but a good way to oppose the administration right now is to stop pretending old bipartisanship still exists, and focus on the problem of incompetents in power rather than blaming Dems for not having some kind of shadow government going on.
