**sorry for the weird symbols in places where there should be quotation marks and apostrophes, it's a formatting issue I'm trying to fix**

It's been a while since I've posted anything substantial here. I suppose you could say I took a short hiatus from blogging. Today I have for you some stories that I think cannot receive too much media attention. The first of which is on Iraq.

Congress finally says to Bush "enough is enough" on Iraq –well sort of

The Senate Democrats push a resolution demanding a clear exit strategy from Iraq, and what do the Senate Republicans do? They take the Dems' version and instead of a clear timetable for the removal of troops they designate 2006 as "a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty . . . thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq."

Meanwhile, President Bush blasts critics of the war.

While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. (Applause.) Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs.
…
They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein. They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. And many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: "When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security." That's why more than a hundred Democrats in the House and the Senate -- who had access to the same intelligence -- voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.

Sen. Chuck Hagel's (R-NE) words:

"The Iraq war should not be debated in the United States on a partisan political platform. This debases our country, trivializes the seriousness of war and cheapens the service and sacrifices of our men and women in uniform. War is not a Republican or Democrat issue. The casualties of war are from both parties. The Bush Administration must understand that each American has a right to question our policies in Iraq and should not be demonized for disagreeing with them. Suggesting that to challenge or criticize policy is undermining and hurting our troops is not democracy nor what this country has stood for, for over 200 years. The Democrats have an obligation to challenge in a serious and responsible manner, offering solutions and alternatives to the Administration's policies."

Finally, a senator is rejecting the calls that criticizing the war is unpatriotic and sends the wrong message to the troops. I can't get enough of Thomas Jefferson's quote, "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."

There was a great political cartoon (I can’t find the link) that I saw yesterday from the Washington Post. It showed President Bush leading the nation through quicksand. Bush stubbornly proclaims, “I didn’t mislead. You misfollowed.”

The tide is definitely turning with the American public. The Dems are finding their voice and the Republicans are actually listening. The walls seem to be caving in on Mr. Bush, but God only knows what lies ahead. At this point, all bets are off. I love the thought of the Republicans staying in this stink through the 2006 elections, but that might just be too good to be true.

Peace.