I like where this plan is going.

Seriously, it’s about time the Democrats took some firm legislative action to prove that this war is headed in the wrong direction. Whether you think we need to pull out now, pull out later, win the war, or whatever, you can’t argue that the war was started on false pretenses for the wrong reasons after having misled the American people into believing something that wasn’t true, and now that it’s devolved into madness and chaos that’s only exceeded by its body count. So who’s to blame for the situation? Sure, we can point the finger at the President, it was his war and his idea and apparently his score to settle in the first place, but the handling of the war-whose fault was that?

Donald Rumsfeld, the Defense Secretary, the same man who’s infamous for misreading history, misunderstanding it, and then outright lying to the American people about the lessons of history, as he revealed again this week when he tried to liken anti-war activists and critics to the kinds of people who sought to appease Hitler in the Nazi march across Europe.

This week, Democrats interpreted a speech of his as equating critics of the war in Iraq to appeasers of Adolf Hitler, an interpretation that Pentagon spokesman Eric Ruff disputed. But Democrats said the hyperbolic attack would backfire.

But even before that, Democrats and some Republicans had maintained that Bush has never held anyone in his administration accountable for decisions in the Iraq war that many military analysts say went disastrously wrong. The decisions include not mobilizing enough troops to keep the peace, disbanding the entire Iraqi army and purging all members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party — including teachers and low-level technocrats — from the Iraqi government.

“Secretary Rumsfeld’s stewardship of this effort is a failure, and he has let down our armed forces,” said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who is pushing for the no-confidence move.

…

Rather than change the subject to domestic issues, as they have tried in past years, Democrats are hoping to confront Republicans head-on.

“We will not be Swift-boated on this issue,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in an interview, alluding to the assault by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth on the Vietnam war record of Democratic candidate John F. Kerry in the 2004 presidential campaign. “We will fight them on national security.”

…

But Democrats — and some Republicans — say a debate on Rumsfeld’s tenure at the Pentagon will present a quandary to embattled GOP incumbents in districts that have turned solidly against the war.

“We are approaching 2,700 dead Americans, 20,000 wounded, many of them missing eyes, missing limbs, facing paralysis,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.). “They want to debate that; we’re happy to debate that.”

Then let the debate begin. The Republicans can’t continue to be led into believing they have the high ground on national security. The American people are tired of being “protected” from the “terrorist threat” that water bottles and toothpaste pose while commuter rail goes all but unprotected and the Federal government has proven itself incapable of protecting its people against a hurricane they saw coming from weeks ahead of time, much less a man-made disaster. The American people are tired of their sons and daughters coming home from a war without end and without point and without planning and without goal in body bags, a morbid testament to the personal global goals of a small handful of old, power hungry men lurking about Washington DC.

[ Democrats Target Rumsfeld ]
Source: The Washington Post