EDITORIAL - Proving that Americans are hard to come by in the Democratic Party, only one Senator came out on the side of victory in Iraq. That Senator, Joseph Lieberman, has since become a primary target for defeat by his own party members. He was penalized for being the only person within his party with the ability to pass an introductory foreign policy class.

Just weeks after announcing that the democrats would unveil what they stand for ?early next year,? Howard Dean, John Kerry, Joe Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid gave us five different stances on Iraq. If you combined all five plans, taking the best from each, it would still be worse than anything Jimmy Carter could come up with.

After stating that ?the idea that we are going to win this war is an idea that, unfortunately, is just plain wrong,? DNC Chair Howard Dean laid out a plan for actually losing the war. Dean proposed sending 80,000 National Guard home and ?redeploying? (not a withdrawal!) 20,000 more to Afghanistan.

Even better, Harry Reid announced we should also ?redeploy? the troops and place them in a friendly neighboring country, and then after the country breaks out into a civil war and the Iraqi's kill each other off, we go back in. By "friendly neighboring country" I wasn't sure if he meant Iran, Syria, or Saudi Arabia.

On MSNBC, Chuck Schumer optimistically claimed that the Iraqis won't ever be able to take over their country because they don't think that the government is legitimate, just another product of The Great Satan. If only Saddam were in charge would the Iraqis finally have a legitimate, caring government.

When asked what the solution to the Iraq problem was, Schumer said there were no good solutions, and the only option is to ?take the best of a lot of bad solutions.? Then he offered a bad solution: Take the Shiites, Kurds, and Sunnis, divide them up and form ?three independent self-governing units.?

John Kerry charged that the US troops were ?terrorizing? Iraqi women and children in their homes in the middle of the night. ("I support the troops!") I guess Howard Dean was right when he said that "women will be worse off in Iraq than they were when Sadaam Hussein was president."

Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha endorsed plans to withdraw all troops within six months, with yet another "strategic deployment," and a promise to send the troops back in when the terrorists start causing problems again. According to them, the United States will be better prepared to fight the insurgency by having them not fight the insurgency.

Within the past week, Pelosi has stated that over half of the Democrats in the House support her plan, thus forcing her colleagues to come out and denounce the plan. Howard Dean has been blasted by everyone in his party for stating a position that they actually believe, but that is politically unpopular to take.

The democrats currently have plans on the table that include immediate withdrawal, 6-month withdrawal, and distant withdrawal. They have plans for increasing the number of troops and decreasing the number of troops. They even have a plan for putting Hussein back in power. Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General under Lyndon B. Johnson, is currently fighting for Saddam's release. Yes, these are the people we need to put in charge of things.

Shortly after returning from Iraq, Senator Lieberman came out on the side of America. He noted the many positive developments happening in both Iraq and in the many other countries who are seizing the opportunity that freedom and democracy brings. He didn't call our soldiers terrorists and he didn't say we were going to lose the war. He didn't take the opportunity to politicize the war by bashing his opponents. And it appears that his opponents are now his own party.