Truespeak

If nothing else, Cindy Sheehan has accomplished two things down in Texas. First of all, she has torn away the mask of compassion from the faces of the Republican masses. O'Reilly, Coulter, Malkin, Limbaugh, all of them have savagely attacked this grieving mother for daring to question the administration's rationale for war. Furthermore, Bush refuses to meet with her, the rest of the talking heads are verbally assaulting her, and the crazies have resorted to vandalism and threats. So much for the compassionate wing of the conservative party.

The other thing that Ms. Sheehan has accomplished is that we are once again discussing when it would be appropriate to withdraw the troops. And in doing so, she has once again put the pressure on the administration to make a choice. Of course the administration claims that we will see the mission through. (Translation: We're riding this piece of shit all the way to the bottom.) But now others are starting to voice their opposition as well. Today, Sen. Russ Feingold actually proposed a date for a complete troop withdrawal.

U.S. Senator Russ Feingold today, at a local Listening Session in Marquette, Wisconsin, proposed a target timeframe for the completion of the military mission in Iraq and suggested December 31, 2006 as the target date for the completion of the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq.

In June, Feingold introduced a resolution calling for the President to clarify the military mission in Iraq, lay out a plan and timeframe for accomplishing that mission, and publicly articulate a plan for subsequent troop withdrawal. Because of the Administration's recent flurry of conflicting signals about the duration of U.S. troop deployments, Feingold said he feels obligated to help jump start that process by proposing a specific goal for bringing U.S. forces home from Iraq.

But it's not just the Democrats that are starting to see the light. Republicans are too. Sen Chuck Hagel, from the dead-red state of Nebraska, thinks it's about time we started to bring them home.

Hagel, a Vietnam veteran, acknowledged the U.S. military presence was becoming harder and harder to justify. He believes Iraq faces a serious danger of civil war that would threaten Middle East stability, and said there is little Washington can do to avert this.

"We are seen as occupiers, we are targets. We have got to get out. I don't think we can sustain our current policy, nor do I think we should," he said at one stop.

[.....]

Nebraska has been a solid Republican state in presidential elections for decades. Republicans dominate state politics and hold most elective offices.

But Hagel said even some who had previously backed Bush strongly on Iraq now felt deep unease.

"The feeling that I get back here, looking in the eyes of real people, where I knew where they were two years ago or a year ago -- they've changed," he said. "These aren't people who ebb and flow on issues. These are rock solid, conservative Republicans who love their country, support the troops and support the president."

Hagel said Bush faced a growing credibility gap. "The expectations that the president and his administration presented to the American people 2 1/2 years ago is not what the reality is today. That's presented the biggest credibility gap problem he's got," he said.

"I hope he has some sense that something's going on out in the country, that there's a lack of confidence that has developed in our position."

Of course the Bush administration is responding to the pressure with their standard answer.

"Setting an artificial timetable would send the wrong message to the Iraqis, who need to know that America will not leave before the job is done. It would send the wrong message to our troops, who need to know that we are serious about completing the mission they are risking their lives to achieve. And it would send the wrong message to the enemy, who would know that all they have to do is to wait us out.

Does anyone really believe that if we said we were pulling out by the end of 2006 the violence would stop? I find it highly unlikely that the insurgents are going to just kick back and relax and wait us out. What a preposterous notion. At this point, Bushco pretty much has to stay in Iraq. Any wavering on their position and the whole facade will crumble. But the pressure's building and the public's confidence is waning.

This could be a real drag on the entire Republican party come 2006. Any Democrat running for office needs to capitalize on it. Now.