In terms of Iraq, you don't have to interpret the ISG report to understand my position: I have advocated for months that we should start withdrawing troops from Iraq and set a date to complete the withdrawal.

Our troops are mired in a civil war. They have served honorably and it is time for them to start coming home.

Lipinski and Bush talk about benchmarks, but Lipinski and Bush keep changing the way we measure those benchmarks.

At the outset of the war, President Bush told the American people that Iraq would be a shining beacon of Democracy in the Middle East. As Iraq descended into a civil war, Donald Rumsfeld told us, "Freedom's untidy and free people are free ... to do bad things."

In 2006, the Republicans said, "When Iraqi forces stand up, we'll stand down."

Now Bush Administration has set "bottom-up reconciliation" as its goal.

In six months, when there's no evidence of "bottom-up reconciliation," Bush will change the framework again.

The problem is elected officials like Congressman Dan Lipinski keep buying the Bush Administration's lines. We know this because, time and time again, when President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney needed a vote on Iraq, they found a friend in Dan Lipinski. When Democrats pushed legislation calling for a withdrawal, Lipinski refused to get on board.

Now Dan Lipinski thinks he has a plan and he's partnered with Mark Kirk to promote it. He wants Congress to adopt the recommendations of the ISG report to change the direction of our Iraq policy.

There are a few major problems with that. The ISG report does not mandate a troop withdrawal, but merely states that it is a "goal." The Lipinski-Kirk Plan is simply more of the same. It's nothing more than the Bush Plan, which calls for a return to pre-surge troop levels.

It amazes me that when Lipinski can't partner with Bush, he goes out and partners with Mark Kirk, who wants us to keep 130,000 troops in Iraq and wait for progress that may never come.

I'm tired of a Congress that does nothing and I'm frustrated that we're in the same position as we were two years ago.

The issue at hand is time.

Americans want to know, and I want to know, "How much longer will our troops be in Iraq?'

U.S. Gen. Petraeus has been unable to answer that question. President Bush has refused to answer that question. Lipinski hasn't answered that question either. The Bush or Lipiski-Kirk "drawdown" was scheduled to happen because the surge troops' tours are coming to a close. It's time for Dan Lipinski and others to stop pretending this is something new.

In the last couple days, Lipinski has, however, provided us with some clues about where he really stands on the "drawdown."

On Monday, he said he was willing to consider a report released by United States Institute for Peace, written by some of the same people who wrote the ISG. That report calls for a commitment of at least five more years.

On Tuesday, Lipinski said a faster drawdown is preferable, but only if it's ok with Republicans.

"I think there is a point at which the President, if enough Republicans say, `We cannot go on this way Mr. President,' I think the President will be forced to back down and change his policy," he said.

It's obvious we can't look to Lipinski for leadership on this issue.

I've had enough and that's why I'm running for Congress. If you feel the same way, then get on board.

Thank you for taking the time to read my first post. I hope you continue to follow my campaign. If you like what you're hearing, I hope you support our campaign by sending us a donation of  $25. Please visit www.PERA08.com for regular updates.