An Iraqi government spokesman criticized the U.S. Senate vote to begin withdrawing U.S. troops by Oct. 1.
”We see some negative signs in the decision because it sends wrong signals to some sides that might think of alternatives to the political process,” Ali al-Dabbagh told The Associated Press.
He spoke after the Senate passed legislation Thursday that would require the start of troop withdrawals from Iraq by Oct. 1. The House passed the same bill a day earlier, and President Bush has promised a veto.
The legislation is the first binding challenge on the war that Democrats have managed to send to Bush since they reclaimed control of both houses of Congress in January.
”Coalition forces gave lots of sacrifices and they should continue their mission, which is building Iraqi security forces to take over,” al-Dabbagh said. ”We see (it) as a loss of four years of sacrifices.”
Thanks, congressional cowards, for selling not just our soldiers down the river–but also those brave Iraqis who have stood up and placed their lives on the line for the future of their nation.
As for Mr. South, our friends at Article VI Blog, as well as Hugh Hewitt and Dean Barnett, have responded in detail to his screed. I’m not going to, because frankly I don’t think it’s worth my time. Apart from his apparent history as a partisan attack dog–see Hewitt, who knows infinitely more about contemporary California politics than I–South appears to be totally confused about the religious topics he addresses in his article. His principal objection appears to be, well, not about Governor Romney in the first place–it’s about Mormons writ large. That’s the first problem. Second problem: The objection is simply that Mormons, well, believe their religion is correct and others aren’t. To South, that’s “intolerant.”
Fellow evangelicals, I hope that sounds familiar, because that’s the charge we face all the time for saying Jesus is the only way. (Al Mohler has spoken on this, as have my old pastor, Phil Ryken, and many others.) It is pathetic for South to assail Governor Romney for believing his faith–and evangelicals would be fools to say it’s okay to reject a candidate simply for that. The very same criticism could have been used against President Bush in 2000 and, if we accept in 2008, will–not might, but will–be used against any high-profile evangelical presidential candidate thereafter.
By the way–speaking of 2000, do you remember the row when President Bush spoke of a debate of his admiration for Jesus’ moral philosophy? Well last night in South Carolina, Senator Edwards said his Lord, his wife, and his father were his moral leaders. Where’s the outrage? Maybe he believes his faith, too–call Garry South!
One final note–do you think South wrote a similar column about Harry “The War Is Lost” Reid? You know, the Senate Democratic Leader who’s a Mormon?