At times during our nation’s history, difficult and compelling policy issues have demanded courage from our political leaders, requiring them to rise above party concerns or political fears to provide real vision in a time of crisis. During the battle to end slavery, the women rights movement, the African-American civil rights struggle and the debate around the Vietnam War, courageous leaders gave us all voice in troubled times.

I had hoped, as a gay man, that I would see others be as courageous as Senator Russell Feingold on the marriage issue. Clearly, that is unlikely to happen in this election year. How embarrassing it was to watch the leading Democratic presidential candidates attempt to explain their positions on marriage at the HRC Forum. I doubt that any of them personally believed their own awkward attempts to explain why millions of Americans should be denied their constitutional rights.

The Iraq War, however, is another issue all in itself.

In fact, we can expand the Iraq issue to include Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Each day brings more death and devastation in these countries, while inching us closer to a wider conflict that could engulf the entire Middle East. We cannot wait any longer for real leadership.

I believe that Iraq has become one of the great moral issues of our time, rising above politics and any one party. If we fail to understand the impact the war might have on our long-term strategic interests, in the Middle East and beyond, and do not act accordingly, we will have done a grave disservice to future generations of Americans. If continue on as we have, there may come a day when it is simply too late for reasoned solutions and a tide of extremism is let lose upon the world from a number of nations.

Over the last several months, we’ve witnessed a number of resolutions fail to get through Congress and raucous debates on timelines for withdrawal. Meanwhile, cots have been placed outside the Senate and Bush has stifled the conversation with veto threats. Presidential candidates have offered solutions from Biden's partition to Obama’s plan to cut off funds until a timetable is established to Edwards’ unequivocal statement that the troops should redeploy now. Meanwhile, the Democrats in Congress are seeking to reassure the base that they are doing all they can do given Bush’s veto power and bully pulpit.

Maybe so, but I don't buy it. Maybe this is an issue that should bypass party affiliation. Perhaps each elected official should be judged on their own position and degree of leadership. Maybe concerned citizens should support primary challenges against Democrats who continue to support Bush’s policies. Certainly, the defeat of pro-war Democrats would send a powerful message of zero tolerance for continued incompetence in Iraq.

Ironically, we have seen more courage from people who support the war like Lieberman and McCain, both of whom were willing to take unpopular stands to advocate continuing this policy. Say what you want, but they put their careers on the line for their personal beliefs.

We may soon see average Americans, who are concerned about their country, organize more massive demonstrations, civil disobedience and displays of outrage through non-violent action. I really don't know.

What I do know is that we are continuing to send our children to die in a war that was based on lies, deception and greed. We are continuing to destroy another nation and its people. And that Pakistan is on the edge of becoming a disaster and the Taliban have gained ground in Afghanistan, all while we are laying out plans for an air war in Iran.

We simply have to stop this madness.

What is reasonable to expect of the Democrats? I doubt much more will emerge from the party than we have been seeing. But we have every right to expect greatness from those seeking the presidency. We should demand to know their timetables for bringing the troops home. We should know how they feel about the increasing oppression in Pakistan. We should know without a doubt how they feel about a war against Iran. What are their plans?

No one can speak of the war more eloquently than Frank Rich of the The New York Times. More than any other individual, he has constantly and articulately given reasoned voice to opponents of the Iraq War. This past Sunday he wrote about what we should expect from our presidential candidates:

"It's also past time for the Democratic presidential candidates to stop getting bogged down in bickering about who has the faster timeline for withdrawal or the more enforceable deadline. Every one of these plans is academic anyway as long as Mr. Bush has a veto pen. The security of America is more important — dare one say it? — than trying to outpander one another in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The Democratic presidential candidates in the Senate need all the unity and focus they can muster to move this story forward, and that starts with the two marquee draws, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. It's essential to turn up the heat full time in Washington for any and every legislative roadblock to administration policy that they and their peers can induce principled or frightened Republicans to endorse.

They should summon the new chief of central command (and General Petraeus's boss), Adm. William Fallon, for tough questioning; he is reportedly concerned about our lapsed military readiness should trouble strike beyond Iraq. And why not grill the Joint Chiefs and those half-dozen or so generals who turned down the White House post of "war czar" last fall? The war should be front and center in Congress every day.

Mr. Bush, confident that he got away with repackaging the same bankrupt policies with a nonsensical new slogan ("Return on Success") Thursday night, is counting on the public's continued apathy as he kicks the can down the road and bides his time until Jan. 20, 2009; he, after all, has nothing more to lose. The job for real leaders is to wake up America to the urgent reality. We can't afford to punt until Inauguration Day in a war that each day drains America of resources and will. Our national security can't be held hostage indefinitely to a president's narcissistic need to compound his errors rather than admit them.

The enemy votes, too. Cataclysmic events on the ground in Iraq, including Thursday's murder of the Sunni tribal leader Mr. Bush embraced two weeks ago as a symbol of hope, have never arrived according to this administration's optimistic timetable. Nor have major Qaeda attacks in the West. It's national suicide to entertain the daydream that they will start doing so now. "