A key point that I had missed in looking at the vote yesterday on S J Res 9 was that (see Daily Digest)

the unanimous-consent agreement of Thursday, March 15, 2007, requir[ed] 60 votes for the adoption of the joint resolution...
 

The roll call page says Required for majority: 1/2 but that's just a tad misleading!

There's more...

The last time the Senate tried to pass an Iraq measure, it was stymied at the stage of cloture on the motion to proceed.

This time - with S J Res 9 - cloture on both the MTP and the res itself sailed through. Almost eerily, one might say, given all the hoo-hah last time out.

The vote on passage failed by just 48-50. But, to judge by this AP piece a miss was as good as a mile:

There's more...

The Democratic Party is not the peace movement, it is a political party.  And when I blogged this piece today, Tom Hayden's point that "at least the Pelosi measure is tying the Democratic banner to the notion of a withdrawal timeline" is important.  Here's good news from the House:

The House Appropriations Committee Thursday approved, largely along party lines, the Iraq supplemental spending bill.

Democrats prevailed with their plan of attaching a withdrawal timetable for U.S. troops to the measure, which passed 36-28.

Rep. Barbara Lee (Calif.) was the sole Democrat voting against the bill, but she agreed not to offer a fast-withdrawal amendment, which Democratic leaders considered troubling, to the underlying bill.

"I don't think the president deserves another chance," Lee said.

And there's good news from the Senate.  The Reid resolution on withdrawal lost 48-50.  Lieberman, Pryor, and Ben Nelson voted no, Gordon Smith voted yes.  That means that we had three only defections - over 95% of the Democratic Senate caucus voted for a timeline, which is a far cry from the 22 who voted against the war in 2002.  And the Republicans stayed steady at one defection (Chafee voted against the war in 2002).

As the Progressive States campaign to pass state resolutions continues, this is putting crushing pressure on the Republicans at all levels.  If Republicans get enough pressure, Bush will have to fold.  If not, even red state Senate like Cornyn and McConnell can be voted out of office.

2006 was a mandate to restrict Bush and end the war, and Democrats listened.  It's tragic, more than tragic, that the Republicans are going to keep the war going, and it's our job to get the public to understand that this war can end, and that getting Republicans out of office is the way to end it.  Only in doing so can we move the Republicans to either end the war or end their careers.

UPDDATE: Arcuri, one of the members on the list of possible Blue Dog saboteurs, is supporting the supplemental. And here's Sestak:

"Although I am disappointed there is not one fixed date certain by the end of the year to redeploy out of Iraq, as my legislation proposes, in order to permit a change in strategy to where the Iraqis as well as Iranians and Syrians have an incentive to work for stablity, I am pleased we are moving in the right direction for an end date to this War, so we can enhance our security around the world."

He sounds more liberal than Blue Dog here, but he's still equivocating. Here's the list, updated:

Michael Arcuri (NY-24)
John Barrow (GA-12)
Melissa Bean (IL-08)
Dan Boren (OK-02)
Jim Cooper (TN-05)
Bud Cramer (AL-02)
Lincoln Davis (TN-04)
Joe Donnelly (IN-02)
Brad Ellsworth (IN-08)
Bob Ethridge (NC-02)
Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20) ???
Baron Hill (IN-09)
Tim Mahoney (FL-16)
Jim Marshall (GA-08)
Mike McIntyre (NC-07)
Collin Peterson (MN-07)
John Salazar (CO-03)
Joe Sestak (PA-07)
Heath Shuler (NC-11)
Gene Taylor (MS-04)

Today's big win in the Appropriations Committee is good for momentum. Win or lose, Pelosi is an amazing Speaker.

There's more...