On the August 28 edition of MSBNC's Hardball, guest host and MSNBC chief Washington correspondent Norah O'Donnell left unchallenged the assertion by Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT) that "[s]ince January ... you did not see progress" in Iraq, despite the fact that Shays has made numerous claims since January that “progress” has been made there. Shays cited the lack of “progress” in Iraq since January as part of the reason why, in O'Donnell's words, he had undergone a “change in position” from “fully support[ing] everything that the president and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, have done in Iraq up until now” to “calling for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops.” Moments later, Shays returned to his assertion that “now, it's very different than the past. Progress was made in the past. Progress is not being made now.”

Below are some examples of Shays citing progress in Iraq since January.

From a February 9 Shays press release:

"This trip underscored my feeling that we are making progress, but the Iraqis will need continued support to build a stable government, rebuild their infrastructure and develop a strong military and border patrol. At my recent community meetings, I heard many Fourth District residents expressing the sentiment that, whether they agreed with the war or not, we are there now, and want to do the job right before we bring our troops home."

From a February 10 article in The Connecticut Post:

Shays, who returned Tuesday from his 11th visit to Iraq, chided those who want to “leave prematurely,” saying the U.S. has made “huge progress.”

From a February 22 letter Shays wrote to Vice President Dick Cheney:

Although there has been progress made in reconstruction and economic development, the security situation continues to hamper rebuilding efforts and economic development, and many Iraqis are frustrated over the lack of essential services and jobs.

[...]

These observations and recommendations are offered in the hope they will be of use in crafting the plans and policies needed to move Iraq forward toward the ultimate goal: a democratic Iraq capable of securing domestic peace and maximizing its immense oil wealth, water resources and educated population. This is a goal that can be achieved if we continue to see the progress we have seen in the last eighteen months.

From a March 5 article in The Boston Globe:

“Joe [Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (CT)] took a lot of grief from his party when he told the truth as an American about what he saw in Iraq -- that we are making progress -- and it took courage. After bucking my leadership on more than one occasion, I had empathy for him. He put principles over partisanship and he's earned my vote.”

From a May 8 letter Shays wrote to Cheney:

Despite setbacks -- such as the length of time it took Iraqis to select a prime minister and the ongoing violence, including the bombing of the Al-Askari mosque in Samarra -- I am hopeful about the future of Iraq. There are clear signs democracy is taking hold, sectarian violence is being contained and Iraqi military, border patrol and police are assuming more and more of the daily security responsibilities.

[...]

The American public should be better informed of the progress being made developing Iraqi forces. At the same time we should explain why Coalition Forces will remain in Iraq for the foreseeable future -- to ensure this young representative government is not toppled from within and is protected from external threats. American citizens need to know continued funding to improve and sustain Iraq is essential.

From a June 7 Shays press release:

“The death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is a major step forward. He was the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, referred to as the 'Prince' by Osama Bin Laden, and he's dead. He was caught with the help of the Iraqi people and they have a right to celebrate that he is gone.

Combined with Prime Minister [Nouri Kamal al-] Maliki's announcement of his Ministers of Defense and Interior and National Security Advisor, today is a critical step forward in two of the key areas for rebuilding: creating a secure environment and a stable government in Iraq.”

From a June 13 Shays press release:

“The mission in Iraq is far from complete. Only time will tell the impact of al-Zarqawi's death. Iraqi ministers are in place. And Iraqi security forces are becoming more and more effective. As these forces take control, private security firms are presented with a new dimension -- the coordination with not only Coalition forces but with Iraqi forces as well.”

From Shays's opening statement at a House Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations hearing on July 11:

SHAYS: The Iraqi economy is growing. The International Monetary Fund estimates that Gross Domestic Product grew by 2.6 percent last year and is expected to grow by 10.4 percent this year.

[...]

SHAYS: The United States liberated Iraq from a tyrant who tortured and killed his own people. We made mistakes in our efforts to secure and rebuild the country, but we are correcting those mistakes and progress is being made. Yes, the task is difficult, but that only reinforces the need to closely examine our roadmap for success.

From the August 28 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

O'DONNELL: Congressman, with all due respect, while you say that you are not breaking with the president, you are calling for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops and the president has said that that would be emboldening the terrorists. Republicans in your party have called people that are espousing your position now of being cut-and-runners, of wanting to throw in the towel. Why are your doing that, now? Some may look at what you're doing and saying it's political expediency, because you are facing a very tough re-election in Connecticut?

SHAYS: Well, first off, taking this position doesn't help me politically, but more importantly, I want to make sure that you see the distinction. I agree with the president in our mission. I agree that we have got to succeed. The only difference and it's a big difference, but it's the one difference -- and that is: I think the way to get the Iraqis to wake up, to do the heavy lifting, is to let them know that we are not there indefinitely, that there's not an open checkbook, that we're not going take sustained losses indefinitely. The Iraqis need to know that they are going to do the heavy lifting, and if they know that, I think they will start setting the timelines for a constitution, for reconciliation, and for provisional elections. That's what I've learned.

O'DONNELL: Congressman, let's be clear because you have made your 14th trip to Iraq. You have fully supported everything that the president and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, have done in Iraq up until now. And yet, even before you got back on the ground in the United States, you were calling up reporters, and you called the White House, did you not, to tell them that you were now changing your position or modifying your position on the Iraq war? To be clear, what was it that the generals told you on the ground that has caused to you make this change in position?

SHAYS: Well, let me first be clear. I don't support Rumsfeld. I was someone who said he needed to step down. When he made the decisions to disband the [Iraqi] army, the police, and the border patrol, when he allowed the looting, in my judgment, he needed to step down. So, I have been a strong critic along the way on things that I don't like, and I have been a strong supporter of the war because I believe the Iraqis need to succeed.

O'DONNELL: Well, the Democrats on the other side of the aisle in the House of the Representatives are now making clear, according to “First Read,” which is our political document of MSNBC, that they are going to call for a “no confidence” vote on Secretary Rumsfeld when Congress returns. So, will you vote with the Democrats?

SHAYS: Well, if we have a vote, I have no confidence in Secretary Rumsfeld, and I haven't had confidence for a long time. But let me just be clear with you. I believe that we need to do something to motivate the Iraqis to do the things they did last year and the year before. Since January, they spent five months creating a government -- five months. And during that time, you did not see progress. Then, I was there six weeks ago --

O'DONNELL: But you are arguing that a timetable would help motivate the Iraqis --

SHAYS: No, let me finish. Let me finish.

O'DONNELL: That's your position. That's fine. But the president, OK, and the leader of your party says that such a thing actually would embolden the terrorists.

SHAYS: Well, I think he's wrong. And I think what is important to recognize is we now have three months where this government has not shown the political will to do the things that the previous government did. It made tough decisions last year. This government, in fact, [Grand Ayatollah Ali al-] Sistani, the [top Shiite] cleric [in Iraq], pointed out that everybody in the government needs to come back home. They are away. It's almost like they are on vacation, not recognizing that heavy lifting has to start now. They don't have years, they have months. I believe our setting this kind of timeline of when we get our troops not doing police work will help them understand that reconciliation may be a better alternative.

O'DONNELL: You had been to Iraq 14 times, and this is the first time that you are calling for a timeline for withdrawal of U.S. troops and this comes --

SHAYS: Exactly.

O'DONNELL: -- after, in Connecticut, there was a very divisive primary where Senator Joe Lieberman, who has been a hawk on the Iraq war, lost to an anti-war supporter Ned Lamont. So, don't you think many people can look at your change in position and see this as a reflection that you have changed because of the political battleground in Connecticut, not because of the battleground in Iraq, but because you feel politically endangered.

SHAYS: I think people say that, but now, can I give you the answer? Why would I have set timelines last year when what they did is they had an election to create a constitution, had a timeline, then created the constitution. I gave them a pat on the back. They then had a timeline for the election to adopt the constitution. That was progress. Then they created a new government, elected under the constitution.

Why would I have ever thought to do a timeline then when they were making so much progress? It seems to me they created their government. We needed to give them a chance to create the government. Now, they have the government. This government has been placed for three months and now, it's very different than the past. Progress was made in the past. Progress is not being made now. And when you have government officials tell me, and when I ask the Iraqis, “Why aren't you moving forward?” they say, “We will, but we don't want timelines.” I say, they need to have timelines.

O'DONNELL: You called the White House and gave them a heads-up that you were going make this change in position?