Dem's Resolution dishonest, letter by Jim Greaves

The Senate vote to stop a filibuster on "the" resolution to call on Bush to change course in Iraq could not even muster a SIMPLE majority, let alone the super-majority of 60 votes needed to end debate!
In their on-going megalomaniacal rant over the War in Iraq, Democrat leaders keep referring to the election of 2006 as some kind of mandate to end the war. I remind your readers that the corruption of several Congress-people had more to do with the change in party power than any foreign policy of the Bush Administration.
Significantly, only 30 seats out of 435 (or less than SEVEN percent) changed party affiliation last year; the change in the Senate was equally as tiny. If anything, this means @ 93 percent of the voters were, and still are, satisfied with the "status quo", or "the direction in which the nation is heading", another misapplied notion (what subject is wrong?).
If there were a "mandate", the Republicans would have been decapitated in the election, like in 1994 when the Democrat Party lost nearly 30% of its seats. Republicans were not so utterly vanquished in either house of Congress in 2006.
With Congress so evenly divided, there is hardly a majority shift in view! Democrat presidential aspirants can't even decide if they're for taxes or against them!
Seems to me the thin Democrat majority and its allies in the press and among Republicans are dishonest, if not a little mendacious, in their conclusion that the American people wish to abandon Iraq to mob rule. So one might also conclude regarding the comparison of Iraq with Vietnam. It will only be a similar disaster if we allow Hanoi Jane any more air time.
Jim Greaves