A Rose By Any Other Name, Would Smell as Sweet

Friends,

Bush the '07 said of timetables, "And if the Congress wants to test my will as to whether or not I'll accept the timetable for withdrawal, I won't accept one. I just don't think it's in the interest of our troops. I think it -- I'm just envisioning what it would be like to be a young soldier in the middle of Iraq and realizing that politicians have all of a sudden made military determinations. And in my judgment, that would put a kid in harm's way, more so than he or she already is."

This "agreement" still has to be approved by Malaki and then be approved by the always entertaining and fractious Parliament, which at this time, is on summer holiday. It will not go before our Senate.

"So it's not a treaty, so it would not require Senate ratification or anything like that, " said White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe at yesterday's press briefing.

Peace and Love,

Rev O

A Timetable By Any Other Name White House Watch, Washington Post.comPresident Bush has apparently consented to what he previously dismissed as "setting a date for failure."

"In agreeing to pull U.S. combat troops out of Iraqi cities by June, and from the rest of the country by 2011, President Bush has apparently consented to precisely the kind of timetable that, when Democrats called for one, he dismissed as "setting a date for failure." Bush can call it an "aspirational goal" until he turns blue, but a timetable is exactly what it is, thank you very much."

"Bush has repeatedly warned that politics and public opinion should have no role in the decision about when to leave Iraq, but apparently he just meant American politics and public opinion. A clear majority of Americans has favored a withdrawal timetable for several years now, putting anti-war Democrats in control of Congress in 2006."

"So the next big question is this: How will Bush explain this turnaround when he finally emerges from his Crawford vacation? Will he try to downplay its significance? Or will he actually suggest that the job is nearly done in Iraq? That would be a bold move indeed, but not one with a lot of evidence to support it."

The Coverage

Charles Levinson writes in USA Today that Bush literally bought some time. "Iraq initially wanted all combat troops out by the end of 2009, but agreed to push the date to 2011 after the U.S. agreed to protect Iraqi funds in U.S. banks from being seized by creditors," Levinson writes, citing a Maliki aid."

"And while the Iraqi parliament still has a chance to give the agreement a thumbs-up or thumbs-down, the U.S. Congress has no such option. Here's White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe at yesterday's press briefing: "[T]he agreement as it's working its way through the consultative process right now with the Iraqis is not one that would require congressional -- specific congressional approval because this is the type of agreement, in many cases, that we have with many countries around the world. So it's not a treaty, so it would not require Senate ratification or anything like that."