Democrats confused by their own “plan”

According to Washington Time’s Christina Bellantoni, the Democrats have so many “plans” they can’t even keep them straight any more;

Rep. Maxine Waters, California Democrat, of the Out of Iraq Caucus could hardly keep the details straight as she attempted to excoriate the plan proposed by her Democratic leaders.
    “What they say is, if in fact there is no progress that we will pull out, if they can’t certify by October, by December, but if there is progress, if they are doing well, we will stay,” she said. “This would eventually get us out perhaps by March. The latest we would get out I guess with another progress report, or certification, by August of 1980.”

Yup, 1980. I guess Marxist Maxine isn’t getting senile much.

So let’s listen (or read, rather) to Nancy Pelosi’s explanation;

After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi carefully detailed the Democrats’ suggested benchmarks and requirements for President Bush to ensure that U.S. troops are fully ready before being sent to Iraq, reporters peppered her with questions to try and get the point.
    “I’m confused,” one reporter told the speaker.
    “OK, well, let’s try again,” the California Democrat responded. “If the president cannot demonstrate that progress has been made in reaching the benchmarks which he, President Bush, has established by July 1 of 2007, we begin — the 180-day period of redeployment begins, to be finished in 180 days.”
    But, what happens between July 1 and Oct. 1? the scribe asked. 
   “If the president shows that progress is being made on July 1, say he can certify that, then we …”
    “All he has to do is say progress is being made?” the perplexed reporter interrupted.
    “Well, he has to certify and demonstrate that it has been. If he cannot — if he does that, that takes us to October 1, where we want to see the completion of those benchmarks. If that is not achieved, the 180 days begins.”
    Some in the room giggled.
    Exasperated, she concluded: “No matter what, by March 2008, the redeployment begins.”

Got that? Me neither.

Kimberly Strassel of the Wall Street Journal describes Peolsi’s dilemma;

Ms. Pelosi has been backed into a tight corner over President Bush’s $100 billion request for war funding. Hoping to quell a revolt from a liberal bloc that wants out of Iraq, pronto, the speaker unveiled a new, new plan yesterday that includes a timetable for withdrawal — to begin as early as July. Ms. Pelosi needs to win this vote, the first real showdown over Iraq. But it’s becoming increasingly clear she can only do that by sacrificing her moderate wing, which opposes her plan and could pay heavily for it in next year’s election.

Maybe it’s because the Democrats don’t know why they won the Novemeber election. They’d like to think it’s because of the war – that would be the easiest answer. But, I’ve always held that they won because republican Congress was acting too much like a Democrat Congress and it angered Republican voters. But Democrats would have to give up their “mandate from the voters” in order to admit that scenario.

So we bloggers will get two more years of foundering Democrats to point at and laugh.

Category: Politics, Terror War