That'll be the day

Representative Mark Udall argues for a "bipartisan" effort to take control of the war in Iraq away from the Commander in Chief and the generals conducting it, by setting a timetable for pulling our troops out. It's not "redeployment," Sir, it's surrender.

This repeated call to bipartisanship isn't any such thing. It's a demand for Republicans to be "fair" and just let the Democrats make the decision. That's all they can do now, having lost all power in Washington.

Maybe they should take some time and study what Republicans did when they were in a similar fix.

A few quotes from Udall's bizarre argument:

For the good of the country, we also need to lay the foundation for a true bipartisan response to terrorism and the future course of American policy in Iraq. That is why the "debate" that took place in the House last week was so important.

While the debate was long, it was far from bipartisan, and far from full.

You see what's going on? He's saying that because Democrats didn't get to define the terms of the debate, its result wasn't valid, as though election winners shouldn't be allowed to make their own decisions. It seemed quite clear to me what the Dems' preferences are in this matter, but I see no reason why the majority owes them time to do nothing but attack the president, without contributing anything to the debater other than "you should let us win!"