See, all is not lost.  One setback and some people are ready to cave.  C'mon, it took the Right decades to achieve what they've achieved.  Their power didn't just happen overnight.  And they haven't even been able to ban abortion - yet - after thirty five years of Roe.

I swear, I'm almost inclined to think that some people are glad the Dems capitulated, because it gives them the excuse they were looking for to get lazy and leave the party.  The people who are so "upset" by this that they are throwing in the towel would have found another excuse to do just that down the road.  These are the people who are constant complainers, expect perfection from the Democratic elected officials, but, when it's time to contribute money or work, they are nowhere to be seen.

How many congress members voted for McGovern?  That's hella impressive.  Let's keep fighting.  

There is an alternative to caving, and it's still possible. That is to include one final benchmark in this bill: an Iraqi referendum on the continued occupation of their country. With 71 percent of Iraqis wanting U.S. troops out in a year or less, this would be sure to pass. Adding this benchmark would be the functional equivalent of a withdrawal timeline. It would likely lead to the withdrawal of all U.S. troops by the end of 2008, if not earlier. I have written an extensive four-part diary exploring all facets of this idea which I've posted on MyDD, under the name "A New Way Out of Iraq."

In brief, my proposal is for the Congress to add the following section to pending legislation: The Iraqi government is strongly urged to hold a referendum within four months after this legislation is signed on whether and for how long the occupation of Iraq should continue.  The U.S. government is required to support and facilitate the holding of such an election, and if the Iraqi government asks us to leave, to do so, according to their timetable and their requirements.

The basic concept behind the referendum was supported by 67 percent of Republicans in a little-noticed November 2006 poll by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).
The poll asked "if the majority of the Iraqi people say they want the United States to commit to withdraw U.S. forces according to a timeline of no more than a year, do you think the U.S. should or should not do so?" 67 percent of Republicans said the United States should do so (close to the overall support of 73 percent). That's a shift from two-thirds support for the president's position to two-thirds support for a one-year withdrawal from Iraq!

And because it does not tie the president's or the military's hands in conducting the war, it would be hard for the president to veto, to reject legislation that encourages Iraqis to exercise their democratic rights when the Bush administration has supported democratizing the Middle East and justified the U.S. presence in Iraq on that basis. Even if such legislation is vetoed and the veto upheld, however, its passage by Congress might well encourage the Iraqis to hold such a vote on their own initiative. After all, last week, the majority of the Iraqi parliament, 144 out of 275 members, signed a petition calling for a withdrawal timeline.

I urge you to bump these diaries onto your front page and to cross-post at Daily Kos so we can have a chance to add what amounts to a withdrawal deadline to this awful compromise bill. And please forwward this idea to members of Congress.  

I'm honestly asking. Does Bush start an orderly withdrawal? Or does he keep the troops in Iraq without funding, as supplies run out? Is there a third possibility?

The Democrats must be planning on another Iraq major showdown in September, hoping that by then public opinion for the war has eroded even further.   But, they should not blink on this TODAY.  The American people are behind them.  Force Bush to veto more bills and see his support go further South.  It is a political winner for us already.    

For what it's worth, when I called my freshman congressman Chris Murphy's (CT-5) office, the receptionist said that he was "inclined to vote against" the bill.

"I did some quick math. With 433 current members of Congress, start with 232 Democrats, add 10-15 Republican defectors, minus eight progressive Democrats who have consistently refused to vote for any more funding at all, plus eight conservative Democrats who always want a blank check, and you seemingly have a ceiling of 242-247 votes in favor of the bill."

Maybe I missed something, but aren't you counting the 8 conservative Democrats TWICE here?

Fr some reason, it just feels as if the leadership is just playing aroun, unwilling to stand up to Bush. Whoever votes more money for war, owns the damn war. I'm very disappointed in Pelosi, Murtha, Moyer, and company for bringing up a bill, pretend they are against it without doing anyhing to defeat it.

I feel like the Dems are taking my lunch money once more.