As Bryan points out, what exactly is causing the massive slide in violence in Iraq is an issue that Democrats are split on. While some admit it to be caused by the surge of troops, others (ahem) refuse to credit out troops, saying terrorists have simply run out of people to kill. The latter being, how do I put this…bullsh*t.

We now know where House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer stands: It’s the surge.

On the Spot (CNSNews.com) - House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said on Tuesday that the troop surge, which began in June, has had a significant impact on the situation in Iraq and noted that he had always been critical of the Bush administration for deploying an insufficient number of troops in previous years.

“Stability and a decrease in violence, they’ve done that - God bless them. I’m not surprised that they did,” Hoyer told Cybercast News Service in response to a question about steadily declining U.S. casualty rates in Iraq.

As for Leahy?

Despite the steady decline of combat deaths over the last five months in Iraq, only one number mattered to Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).

“I heard that we had the highest number of casualties this year of any year,” Leahy told Cybercast News Service. “Make sure you get your numbers right, and I’ll be happy to answer your questions.”

Really, dumbass? Could that be because the surge only went into full effect in September, starting at the beginning of summer? He’s found a very convenient way to ignore the fact the surge has worked. He doesn’t address the fact that casualties have fallen by 70% since the swell of troops, morale among our forces is high, and even the media has had to concede obvious improvements in Iraq.

CNS notes:

However, the spike in deaths that came at the start of the year mostly occurred before the surge of 30,000 troops. Other members of Congress from both parties recognized the declining rates of combat deaths, reaching the lowest figure since spring 2006.

Anyway, props to Hoyer for admitting the root cause of the decline in violence.