My prediction is that some version of this will be on many Republican candidates' lips this fall. The only question is whether it will be enough to force Bush to face reality, and to finally begin to end the war in Iraq. Democrats need 17 or 18 Republicans in the Senate, and around 60 or so in the House, in order to put together a veto-proof majority. These are the numbers to watch, as only they will end the war in Iraq.

Read Complete Article »

While some in the media are holding out hope that the White House will sit down like adults and work with the congressional conference committee to agree on language that Bush will actually sign, it must be said that this is deluded and wishful thinking. Because Bush wants to veto this bill -- for several political reasons.

Read Complete Article »

So forgive me for wanting to change the channel when I hear DiFi (as she is familiarly know to her California constituents) waxing indignant over Gonzales' actions on television news. I would much prefer to hear a more consistent and believable Democratic Senator. Like Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy (D-VT), for example.

Read Complete Article »

The first part of the legislation is a brilliant idea championed by Jack Murtha. It is a masterful bit of legislative jiujitsu that turns the tables on Republicans (which is why they've been so terrified of it, and why right-wing pundits have been personally attacking Murtha ever since he came up with the idea). Murtha's idea is to tie Bush's hands by requiring any soldiers deployed to Iraq to be (1) fully trained, (2) fully equipped, and (3) have had the adequate rest time off the battlefield which Pentagon regulations require. You can see why Republicans are terrified of the prospect of voting against such an idea -- how can you say you "support the troops" if you vote against any of these common-sense ideas which actually do support the troops instead of just paying lip service to the idea? But since the Republicans have been making such a stink, Pelosi has seemingly softened the language a bit, by adding a loophole whereby Bush could send untrained, unequipped and unrested soldiers into Iraq by personally signing off a waiver for them to go, no matter what the Pentagon said. Although the mainstream media is painting this as somehow "backing down" from Murtha's original stance, it is also a brilliant way to paint Bush into a corner. If troops were demonstrably not ready to go, and Bush signed off on them anyway, then he will be the one to pay the political price with the military families and the public at large.

Read Complete Article »

That adds up to 57 votes. And that is three votes short of the 60 which are needed. Can the Democrats convince three Republican senators (most likely, three who are up for reelection in 2008) to vote against their party in the hopes of keeping their jobs?

I certainly hope so, but I wouldn't bet money on it at this point. Especially since Harry Reid is not only holding a Saturday vote at the beginning of a holiday weekend, but he is also hinting that if they do get the 60 votes to go forward, he will hold sessions all next week to debate the resolution and have a floor vote on it. Congress gets all of next week off, so a vote for the resolution is a vote to deny yourself a week of vacation. Not exactly an enticement for those sitting on the fence. Or maybe Reid is being crafty, and will back down from his threat to take away the Senate's vacation in return for those three votes? That would be a brilliant piece of political hardball, if he could pull it off.

Read Complete Article »

So you can expect a lot of teeth-gnashing, and rending of garments in frustration from the Republicans in the House floor debates this week. But take it all with a grain of salt. The right-wing blogosphere, as I mentioned, is going to reach new heights of high dudgeon, but in the end there will only be one vote. And only one bill will pass over to the Senate, giving Harry Reid the opening he needs to pressure Senate Republicans: the House has already passed a bill, if Republicans stop debate on the House measure, then you are the obstructionists, and we're going to make damn sure American voters are aware of that fact, all the way up to Election Day 2008.

Read Complete Article »

So while a few Republicans are jumping ship now on legally meaningless concurrent resolutions, by summertime it will be a full-scale rout. Republicans will have the time and distance from Bush to say, "Well, we tried the surge, but it obviously didn't work. It's time to bring the troops home." Some of them are already saying this publicly in one way or another: "If the surge isn't working by summer or fall, I won't support it any more." As time goes by this summer, more and more of them will abandon Bush, publicly.

Read Complete Article »

Wow. Think about that for a minute. The cluelessness in coming up with such a statement is truly mind-boggling: "issues that poll at 80, 90 percent" are not "issues that really matter," according to the current Republican congressional leadership. This is earthshaking, because for years Republicans have been hammering Democrats for being "elitist." Now it seems the Republicans are showing their own true "elitist" colors, for all to see.

Read Complete Article »

But don't squander the opportunity. If Democrats prove they can't achieve consensus, and the whole exercise devolves into intra-party squabbles about whose plan is best, then the American people are going to (quite rightly) conclude that it was a mistake to give the Democrats control over Congress in the first place, and will vote accordingly next time around. This is a big test, and I hope the Democrats can manage to pass it with flying colors.

Read Complete Article »

Now that Democrats have won the leadership of Congress, they need to show that they can lead in bold and new directions. This is a perfect opportunity to show they are indeed capable of doing so. I challenge Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to consider these suggestions, and act on them in January.

Read Complete Article »