Shameful and Craven Ignorance: Baron's Statement on the State of the Union

From the Indy Star:

Rep. Baron Hill, D-Seymour: "We have seen little, if any, political progress in Iraq. And, it begs one to ask the question the president averted, as to when the American occupation of Iraq will end. The American people deserve a clear-cut answer to this question."

Never has an elected official representing Indiana been so divorced from reality.

No political progress?

On January 12, the Iraqis passed an amendment to their de-Baathification law aimed at reconciling with Sunnis. Democrats, like Mr. Hill, frequently cited this as one of the most necessary things necessary for political progress in Iraq.

Given such a monumental achievement, unnoticed in America as it might be, it is impossible to say that there has been "little, if any, political progress in Iraq."

If this is not political progress, when it has already been defined as an objective by Democrats like Baron, then what is?

Maybe the report two weeks ago (while Baron was off on vacation) by the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations can be considered progress:

Iraq faces a period of economic growth and political progress, according to assessments by the International Monetary Fund and the UN.

The IMF sees 7% growth in 2008 and a similar rise next year, and says oil revenues from buoyant exports should be up by 200,000 barrels a day.

The UN envoy to Iraq welcomed dialogue between the Sunni and Shia communities and praised the government's work.

I suspect that if we had 7% growth here in the United States, it would be considered progress.

Unless, of course, it was under a Republican president; then we would certainly be living in the worst economy since the Great Depression.

Back in December, it was noted that violence in Iraq is at its lowest level since the first year of the war (when, I might add, Baron was still in office and was very much still in support of what was then a quite popular war).

Iraqi forces have also formally taken control of their own security for half of their country.

Violence in Iraq is at its lowest levels since the first year of the American invasion, finally opening a window for reconciliation among rival sects, the second-ranking U.S. general said Sunday as Iraqi forces formally took control of security across half the country.

Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, the man responsible for the ground campaign in Iraq, said that the first six months of 2007 were probably the most violent period since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. The past six months, however, had seen some of the lowest levels of violence since the conflict began, Odierno said, attributing the change to an increase in both American troops and better-trained Iraqi forces.

I am unsurprised that Baron is utterly unaware of this progress, and of the general consensus that has evolved--even in the partisan halls of Washington--about the success of General Petraeus and the surge he designed.

Baron Hill's behavior with regard to Iraq has been a shameful disgrace, from his politically-contrived vote for the war to his repudiation of that vote as soon as the war became unpopular.

From his wavering and often contradictory votes for or against war funding, to his assertion to lefty supporters that he would never vote for such funding ever again, he has never stood firm on anything.

Let's not forget his claim in the campaign that anyone wearing the American uniform "deserves all the support they can get" in his campaign ads last year, compared to his blatant insult of the members of the Hoosier National Guard bound for Iraq (to fight in a war he voted to start) when he decided to go on a taxpayer-funded vacation in the Pacific (including Vietnam) instead of bidding them farewell in Indianapolis with many other Indiana politicians of note, Republican and Democrat.

Ignorance on Iraq, for Baron, is merely par for the course.

He has never done right by the young men and women he voted to send to war, and he has never even paid much attention to what is going on in the war itself when progress is made.

Baron Hill just mindlessly panders to the anti-war crowd, and his treatment of them is itself no more sincere than his original assertions of support for the war or his claims in the last election that American soldiers "deserve all the support they can get."