WHAT SHOULD DEMOCRATS SAY TO BUSH ABOUT IRAQ? JOHN EDWARDS AND LLOYD DOGGETT CAN GIVE EVERYONE A VERY GOOD IDEA OF HOW TO BEST HANDLE IT

John Edwards has the right answer-- the only right answer-- to Bush's request for more funding for the occupation of Iraq.

"The president today asked for yet another chance. We can no longer afford to bet American troops on a chance. In fact, even members of the president's own party are running out of patience with the relentless pursuit of his failed Iraq policy. Why on earth would Congress make a concession to Bush when support to end the war may be climbing? Congress should stand firm. The only real power it has to end this war is to cut off funds. They passed a plan to support our troops and bring them home, and they should do it again. Nothing else will work. And if the president vetoes it, then it is his willful behavior alone that is standing in the way of what our troops need."

Edwards wasn't pleased yesterday when Bush announced he would veto the compromise the House was planning to vote on today.

"Earlier today I said the compromise under discussion is a concession, and now the president is already saying he'll veto it. The president has just demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that he cannot be negotiated with, he cannot be compromised with.

"He is dead set on pursuing his discredited strategy in Iraq without regard to the cost in lives, the evidence of its failure, or the clear will of the American people.

"There is only one way to stop him-- Congress must cut off funds to prolong the war. That's the only real power they have to end this war. They passed a plan to support our troops and bring them home, and they should do it again.

"Nothing else will work. And if the president vetoes it-- if he vetoes any bill that supports our troops but sets conditions-- then it is his willful behavior alone that is standing in the way of what our troops need."

Sounds like at least one Democrat running for President is moving towards understanding the need to impeach Bush now.

Meanwhile Bush says he'll go along with "benchmarks." He has been steadfastly refusing to consider them but suddenly did an about-face and now says they make sense. "Until now, the Bush administration has rejected the idea of including benchmarks in a funding bill, which has won steady support from many Democrats and Republicans. 'One message I have heard from people of both parties is that benchmarks makes sense, and I agree,' he said. 'It makes sense to make benchmarks part of our discussion on how to go forward.' Speaking to reporters after a briefing at the Pentagon, Bush said he had asked his chief of staff, Joshua Bolten, to 'find common ground' with Congress on benchmarks." Yes, it does make sense. The last time Bush talked about it, though, he accused Democratic congressional leaders of "playing politics." The man is off his rocker and a danger to our nation (not to mention a disgrace to his office).

Texas moderate Lloyd Doggett also answered Bush today-- on the floor of Congress. He spoke eloquently and forcefully and he pulled no punches. May I suggest that you wach this powerful 2 minute video clip?

Year five of blunders-– that is true "slow bleed" policy in Iraq.

"Defeatism"-– that is an Administration that lacks the courage to admit its failures and which pays for those failures with the blood of the brave, some else’s blood, and with $10 billion dollars of your tax money every single month.

"Gimmicks" are what got us into Iraq in the first place. It certainly was not the "War on Terror."

You can make all the excuses you want for continuing to embed our troops in a civil war, but a vote today for the Iraq Redeployment Act is a vote to end endless war. It is a vote for a fully-funded, safe, and orderly redeployment that allows us to refocus on the "War on Terror," which is a threat to our families, not the war in Iraq, which is not.

It is not the enemy that has us pinned down in Iraq today, it is this Administration’s unwillingness to admit its mistakes and its lies.

The intervention in Iraq was this country’s largest foreign policy blunder. Now, it is time for Congress to intervene. With this war in its fifth year, for Congress not to act now is for Congress to become an enabler and accomplice to the Administration’s errors.

Vice President Cheney rightly complains about the Iraqi Congress proposing to take a two month vacation, but what is really at fault here is the Vice President’s and this Administration’s four-year vacation from reality.

"Victory" is improving our families’ security. Pursuing policies contrary to that objective-- committing the same error over and over again-- that is "defeatist."