[LZ_Bayonet]

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., called Iraq a "defeat."

"What we now have in Iraq is a defeat.

Just saw this on FoxNews website, after my above post. It cannot get any clearer. Now that the Dems have taken this position, and since they have the power from the voters, insuring this call ("defeat") has become Job #1. Any other outcome has now "officially" become unacceptable to them.

[LZ_Bayonet]

Another comment just viewed -
From:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1786073/posts
An interview with Mark Steyn:
MS: Well you know, this is the stuff that matters if you’re in Iraq. The President gets no credit for it over here, because the war has in effect departed the physical constraints of Iraq, and is essentially now being waged for political considerations in Washington. And no news is good news, and sadder news is badder news, basically. I mean, the New York Times had this ludicrous piece yesterday arguing that the departure of Muqtada al Sadr for Iran could leave a power vacuum in Iraq that would be filled by even more extreme forces. In other words, whatever…whether the President kills the guy, whether he makes him prime minister, whether he chases him to Iran, as far as the New York Times is concerned, there’s no good news. And what we see, what astonishes me, I mean, I had a kind of out of body experience reading the Washington Post today, because it was like going through some sort of hallucination. I’ve never seen war coverage like it, where one party has in fact decided to take what it calls the slow bleed strategy, it’s quite openly telling people it doesn’t want to have the courage of its convictions and defund the war, it wants to deny the President the possibility of victory, while ensuring that it doesn’t get stuck with any blame for defeat, and this is completely contemptible.