Big, tough guy

GW Bush said this today: “Debating these differences should not come at the expense of our troops. Congress shouldn’t tell generals how to run the war. Delays beyond April and into May will affect the readiness of the American military. Enough politics.”

Yeah, well you're an irresponsible politicker too. And you started it. SO THERE!

But seriously, "enough politics"? I'm confused, how is it that "the decider" gets to say 'enough'? I believe the US Constitution allows the voters who elected an opposing majority in the House to have a say as well.

Let me see if I've got the spin straight here...

The US needs to send more money and more soldiers to Iraq to do good, serve George Washington's ideas of freedom, save the world from Islamofacists, blah blah blah.
The UK (our strongest ally in this crusade) is pulling money and soldiers out of Iraq because things are going so well in their sector.
Is there a particular reason why our strong ally won't transfer some of their bodies and equipment into the US sector before the US pours more blood and money down the drain? Isn't that what allies and a 'coalition of the willing should do for each other?
I can't think of a way to spin that one. Even my cynical mind can't conceive of a one liner to twist it in favor of the Republican apologists. Better to avoid the question.

Let me take a REAL stab at answering it. The reason is that the UK government has had enough of this quagmire and they are leaving the US to mop it up. Labour must give in to public opinion a bit and appear sensible because a campaign is soon to start there. I can't say that I blame them. I wish Tony Blair would have had the balls and brains to walk away from it 2 years ago.

"We have a new strategy with a new mission: Helping secure the population, especially in Baghdad.”

This is the same old spinning word games on the same old "stay the course" strategy. And then there was this sameoldsameold gem from today's address: "To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible.”

Coupla things. Securing the people of Baghdad is not a new idea. It may be new to W, but it certainly has been thought of previously. Second, Democrats and Republicans alike have been proposing strategic ideas for YEARS that differ from the President's same old strategy. W's assertion that his opposition has proposed nothing is a huge lie. It is either a lie of ignorance or a bald-faced, knowing twist on the truth to smear opponents.

Now, I think W and his inner circle are more evil than ignorant but intelligent liberals can disagree about such things. I might be able to accept the premise that the W-ites are simply too stupid and insulated to have heard other ideas, but I tend to lean toward the notion that they have heard the other ideas, dismissed them outright, and are now righteously acting as if the plans never existed.

Remeber, WE voted this evil into power. We now eat the poo they feed us.