HOUSTON -- You haven't lived until you've heard lifelong Texas Republicans call Bush & Cheney "war criminals."

Not to imply that that's the only thing Bush and Cheney get called by some people who at one time voted for them. Good strong comments about lack of competence, intellect, attention span and general information also float around the pathetic spectral remnants of what some pundits used to call Bush's "aura of invincibility."

None of this is the shock it might be. I've gotten word of similar discourse, to use the polite term, from Mississippi Republicans and related country-club apolitical types. If Bush has any power base left, it's his relatives. Still, it is an illuminating reflection on the fathomless and gullibility of commentators on CNN, MSNBC, ABC and elsewhere who talk straight-faced about Bush's "Iraq policy," to hear actual vets and relatives of enlistees discuss Iraq. In a word: It's worse than Vietman. There is no safe combat around IEDs and community-based homemade bombs and other weapons. There is no end in sight. Our 'surge' is a surge in macho posturing for some politicians, but there is no way an American presence is going to be anything but a target. The problems in Iraq are not going to be solved in the next few months, and the bottom line is that there is no point in our staying.

Et cetera.

The Dems in Congress, by the way, are looking feeble. They are being vilified or dismissed for being too inept to pull their own worst reps into line. They are not strong enough to hold the GOP depradations at bay, because they lack the courage to take a clear stand. They were elected to end the war. They know it. Yet they can't even say so openly, when their own seats are at risk, and Pelosi and Reid are going to bear the brunt of the national disappointment.

The one-note stereotype of GOP voters pushed ardently by some press and by some 'moderate' Democrats needs serious revision, if you're interested in accuracy. I can vouch from firsthand observation that not all devout or fundamentalist Christians are eager to boost war -- a stance that makes sense if you've actually read the New Testament. There is a deep and abiding schism between religious voters and militaristic voters, in the GOP and elsewhere. More immediately, the threat of "civil war" is treated dismissively: we had a civil war, so did the Brits. People objective enough to treat social issues dismissively also reason that Saddam's regime was a useful makeweight, and Saddam could have been reined in by his own people if they hadn't been weakened by sanctions.

There's nothing like being the Amen Corner for people not even related to you. I leave Houston for home in the morning -- Texas to Maryland via O'Hare, once again -- but it's always refreshing to be back west of the Mississippi.

The narrow political point here is that the Democrats in Congress have very little cover, and that little is rapidly evaporating like smoke over mirrors. Not for much longer are Clinton and Schumer and their ilk going to be able to pretend that everything they've failed to accomplish is because of a bloodthirsty GOP. The most brilliant move the Republicans could make -- if they actually want to remain a party -- would be to insist on withdrawal from Iraq and impeachment of the chief executive who lied us into the war. At some point, they will have to insist on at least one or the other.