The Republicans in theSeante have voted solidly to uphold Bush's veto.
What, exactly would you have the Democrats do? Would you have the 50 Democrats cast 67 votes to override Bush's veto?
Would you have the 50 Democrats cast 61 votes to end Republican fillibusters?
One of the more entertaining aspects of the past 18 or so months has been to watch the transparent strategy of the Democratic Party's leadership. It is and has been to keep the Iraqi 'war' securely tethered to the necks of President Bush and the Repubican Party through to the 2008 election in the hope of gaining even more seats in the Congress and perhaps even picking off the presidency. Almost nothing would fill them with greater horror than to wake up and find that a handful of Republicans are willing to back the Democratic Party in what its leaders say it wants to do relative to Iraq. That would in effect hang Iraq around the necks of the Democrats who would then have to "stay the course" or "head 'em up, and move 'em out!". If they opted for the former it would show that they are still the utterly corrupt and venal Party they were during their decades of power prior to '94. If they opt for the latter, they would be smeared with 'losing da wah -- again' as we go into the '08 elections.
I suspect it will take a lot more than just another 2 years of squandered wealth and dead GIs to get Democrats to actually seriously push for anything more than the current status quo.
Yours,
Issodhos
