Oh, my. Where to begin?

Here, then: The left, as a whole, since early 2006, has argued that Iraq is a lost cause, and they've been proven wrong.

The war in Iraq is over. We won. "We," being the USA and the Iraqi people. It's only a "lull" if we pull out.

You say you want a leader who can adjust to changed circumstances. I agree. Bush, after unforgiveable deference to Rumsfeld and some incompetent generals, finally figured that out.

How, exactly, has Obama adjusted? His Rx is exactly the same today as it was before we won -- run away. Things look bad; we've made terrible mistakes -- run away. The surge works just as its advocates said it would -- run away. We're winning -- run away.

Regardless of what you think of how and why we entered this war, do you really think Obama has demonstrated good judgement? He said that we'd lost, that the surge was folly. He's been proven wrong on that. We've won, essentially, so long as our commitment remains. And that victory, so long as we defend it, has come only because of the surge that Obama and other Dems so adamantly condemned and opposed.

Folly, indeed.
ohkelly Reviewed by ohkelly on . Obama Web site removes `surge' from Iraq problem Barack Obama's aides have removed criticism of President Bush's increase of troops to Iraq from the campaign Web site, part of an effort to update the Democrat's written war plan to reflect changing conditions. Debate over the impact of President Bush's troop "surge" has been at the center of exchanges this week between Obama and Republican presidential rival John McCain. Obama opposed the war and the surge from the start, while McCain supported both the invasion and the troop increase. A Rating: 5