In January, when the president unveiled his “surge” policy, Bush vowed to the nation that he had specific goals in mind for Iraq, and expected them to be met. “America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced,” the president said.
We’ve known for a while now that the president’s promise was hollow and meaningless, but this week we’re learning that Iraqis are going to fail on each of the benchmarks Bush talked about.
A progress report on Iraq will conclude that the U.S.-backed government in Baghdad has not met any of its targets for political, economic and other reforms…a U.S. official said Monday.
This afternoon, National Review’s Mark R. Levin responded to the news.
So, the Iraqi government reportedly hasn’t met any of its targets . Has the Democrat [sic] Congress met any of its targets?
Yes, Mark, they’re exactly the same. The war in Iraq is in its fifth year, the 110th Congress is in its sixth month. Courageous Americans are risking life and limb on the battlefield; lawmakers are risking … well, I’m sure they’re risking something. The targets for Iraqi progress include cessation of sectarian bloodshed; the targets for the Democratic Congress (it’s an adjective, Mark, look it up) include the Six for ’06 agenda. Iraq is falling short of its targets because of a brutal civil war; Congress is falling short of its goals because of Republican obstructionism.
Entirely comparable.
Exactly how far gone does someone have to be to make this kind of connection? Just how partisan does a political observer have to be to put such foolishness in print?