Want yet another example of how the Democrats care more about bashing Bush than trying to do good things for the country? Here's a direct quote from the Washington Times:

On Dec. 5, Newsweek magazine touted an interview with then-incoming House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Rep. Silvestre Reyes as an "exclusive." And for good reason.

"In a surprise twist in the debate over Iraq," the story began, Mr. Reyes "said he wants to see an increase of 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops as part of a 'stepped up effort to dismantle the militias.' "

"We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq," the Texas Democrat said to the surprise of many, "I would say 20,000 to 30,000."

Then came President Bush's expected announcement last week, virtually matching Mr. Reyes' recommendation and argument word-for-word -- albeit the president proposed only 21,500 troops.

Wouldn't you know, hours after Mr. Bush announced his proposal, Mr. Reyes told the El Paso Times that such a troop buildup was unthinkable.

He was for the buildup before he was against it. What changed? Bush decided Mr. Reyes was right, and Mr. Reyes care more about trying make Bush look bad than anything else. He probably couldn't care less about the Iraq situation, except as a way to gain power for himself and his party. Why else the switch? Why was a buildup necessary a month ago, but unthinkable today? $10 says most major media outlets completely ignore this story, even though a similar flop-flop from a Republican would incite editorials from here to Iwo Jima.