A Quick Comment on the Iraq Supplemental

The Democrats turned their backs on US troops today, forcing them to wait for needed funds while they engaged in political theater. The media have crowned Speaker Pelosi a winner, and have complimented Democrats for holding together so well - with only threats and bribes to force them to do so.

But in the long run, the biggest losers are the Democrats. Rather than end this political theater today and pass a bill that the President will sign, they must continue this charade. Senator Reid will have to try to take up a bill with a date-certain for withdrawal. He'll make every effort to get the 60 votes he needs to pass such a measure. Eventually the Senate will probably pass a supplemental with 'no-strings,' and Congressional Democrats will have to engage in the farce that is a conference committee. Will they try to produce a vehicle that can pass the House and Senate and get vetoed, or will they throw up their hands more quickly and try for the 'clean' bill the President wants. What will the liberals want? What will the Blue Dogs say? And what will Lieberman say?

And all the while the White House will be reminding them of the consequences of failing to act promptly.

Eventually they will be forced to give in, but not before looking silly and extreme - when everyone knows their bill will not be signed into law. And people will wonder about the claims of Democrats that they 'support the troops.' If they do, why don't they stop playing games and get them needed funds?

The Democrats will look extreme and silly. Not a good image to project. And the voters will increasingly regard them as not to be trusted with national defense.

Next year their Presidential nominee will go through the same silliness that John Kerry did - wondering how it is that the voters have been fooled into thinking that the Republican nominee is tougher on terror than the Democrat. They'll bring out Wesley Clark, and Jimmy Carter, and John Murtha, and John Kerry, and all the rest of the Democrat war heroes, to vouch for the credentials of the nominee. And it won't work.

And a big part of the reason will be the charade they are engaging in here.