Sen. Lamar Alexander, who is up for reelection, is posturing distancing himself [1] from Bush and the Petraeus report and getting some bi-partisan support:

"My answer is, let’s have a change in mission as rapidly as we can," said Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, who next year will defend a seat rated by CQ as "Republican favored."

Alexander and Ken Salazar, D-Colo., have jointly proposed changing the mission of troops from combat to support, to reduce the presence long-term and to increase political and diplomatic efforts.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., embraced Alexander’s proposal Monday as a model for bipartisan compromise because it calls for a long-term military presence in the Middle East.

This is the same Sen. Alexander that has voted with the Bush administration every single time [2] on Iraq.

In related news, the Knoxville News Sentinel had an unbelievably absurd front-page above the fold big bold headline today that said "Bush to endorse troop removal" with the sub-head "Speech to outline plan to cut forces in Iraq by 30,000 with conditions." Those would be the 30,000 troops he sent over for the surge. Even Bush is distancing himself from Bush.

The sad thing is, people will buy this B.S., and will be talking about how Bush and the Republicans are doing something while Democrats are sitting around making up silly ads and arguing over whether we should surrender to Iran or al Qaeda.

Democrats need to start calling it like it is, and send all these creeps home that we can in 2008. We need to start by moving Alexander's seat from "Republican favored" to "in play." Who's going to step up to the plate? Democrats need to quit avoiding tough fights and waiting around for wounded candidates to run against.