Pansies…:

President Bush and congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.

Democrats backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203, to override the president’s veto of a $124 billion measure that would have required U.S. forces to begin withdrawing as early as July. But party leaders made it clear that the next bill will have to include language that influences war policy. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) outlined a second measure that would step up Iraqi accountability, “transition” the U.S. military role and show “a reasonable way to end this war.” (emphasis mine)

They make it seem like a timetable for withdrawal was the “radical” strategy. Fuck that, that’s tilting their own playing field against them. Saying “sure we’ll fund the war, but it cannot be open ended” is already a compromise, they could’ve just tried to repeal authorization entirely if they felt like it. If they had any brains, they would’ve trumpeted to any media that would listen something along the lines of “We provided funding and a clear way out, we did OUR job. Bush rejected it, preferring that the US military wander aimlessly with no real goal AND shrinking resources. So, who exactly hates the troops, again?”, then proceeded to sit on the issue until either Bush cracked or his own party started telling him to approve a timetable just so the funds wouldn’t dry up.

Shit like this is why I don’t vote. Even if by chance someone does say something that makes sense, they never stand up for it, and in the end the circus never leaves town. If this is what the Dem majority thinks the definition of backbone is, then they’re lost already.