For the last several months, the White House and its allies have had a consistent message: debating the merit of the war in Iraq is an inherently bad idea. In February, when lawmakers were considering (and passing) a non-binding resolution criticizing the escalation strategy, Tony Snow went so far as to suggest that the debate itself brought “comfort” to terrorists.

A month later, when the House and Senate took up spending measures that included timelines for withdrawal, conservative war supporters said the very discussion sent a dangerous signal to the world, undermined the troops, and “emboldened the enemy.”

But when one cuts through the nonsense and the rhetoric, it looks like the Bush gang finds the Dems’ efforts useful after all.

[Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said Tuesday that] demands in the U.S. Congress for a timeline to withdraw American troops from Iraq are constructive because they exert pressure on Iraq’s leaders to forge compromises.

“The debate in Congress … has been helpful in demonstrating to the Iraqis that American patience is limited,” Gates told Pentagon reporters traveling with him in Jordan. “The strong feelings expressed in the Congress about the timetable probably has had a positive impact … in terms of communicating to the Iraqis that this is not an open-ended commitment.”

How about that, a “positive impact.” For literally months, the White House and its congressional sycophants have been arguing the exact opposite — that dissent is dangerous, that our enemies are listening, and that our troops are undermined when there are political divisions over war policy. But in reality, Dems are doing what the president refuses to do: pressuring Iraqis to step up.