I thought that election night was bad. I could hardly believe that the left-wing Democrats were taking over Congress. But if that turn of events was bitter, then watching the Congress “deal with” Iraq has been unbearable.

Many in Congress have clearly given up on Iraq. Democrats make up the bulk of this group, though they are also joined by a few Republicans, all of whom face re-election in 2008. Some of these legislators suffer from Vietnam dementia. They are obsessed with what they claim was a debacle in Vietnam (having nothing to do, of course, with the tragic lack of resolve offered by their predecessors during that war), and now they aim for a repeat performance in Iraq. Hanoi Jane Fonda even made a recent appearance on the National Mall to cheer the defeatists on. At least they’re joined by a bona fide traitor, then. Whoop-de-doo.

There is another larger group of legislators who don’t deserve to be called defeatists. They are genuinely concerned about American security, and for months they have been calling on President Bush to come up with an effective strategy in Iraq. Let’s face it: the administration was slow to make progress and the Democrats (and, again, a few Republicans) were right to keep pressure on the President. Now, at the very moment our commander-in-chief initiates a promising change of course — the addition of more troops to Iraq — this same group of legislators has balked. They have become our whiners-in-chief.

By failing to vote against funding the war, they effectively give the President and General Petraeus, the new commander, a chance. But they refuse to do so without a bout of self-righteous yowling. The Senate’s cries came these past few weeks in the form of a non-binding resolution that expressed dissatisfaction with the war. According to Senator Joseph Biden (D-Delaware), the resolution would send a clear message to the President: you’re in this alone. The President, though, is on the side of our troops and the Iraqi people. Whose side is Senator Biden on?

Like children unhappy with Daddy’s decisions, the Democrats want to have it both ways. Their temper-tantrums and whining festivals say: “The American people are tired of this war, and I won’t support it.” Their votes for funding, on the other hand, say: “I support this war.” Here is my challenge to the Democrats: get it straight. Either you are for the war, or you are against it.

The childish tendency of these legislators is matched only by their spinelessness. Most of them are willing to do whatever the polls suggest will work best. The Dems have their eyes on the prize — the presidency in 2008 — and they will ride whichever tide takes them there. If success in Iraq is a casualty, then so be it.

The irony of it all, as Noemie Emery suggests in her February 12 article in the Weekly Standard, is that Democrats are now stuck with some real responsibility in the event that things go badly in Iraq. The President will be able to say that at the critical moment when we had a chance to bring stability to Iraq, the conduct of congressional Democrats demoralized our troops and paralyzed the effort. And he would be right.

All things considered, I hope and pray that it doesn’t come to that. I hope and pray that the tides turn in favor of law and order in Iraq, and against anarchy and murder. I must admit that watching our pitiful Congress does not inspire confidence. But let’s look on the bright side: at least our other branches of government and our military don’t run the way that our whiners-in-chief do.