I'm going to apply my almost superhuman powers of logical analysis, my incredibly deep political, historical and diplomatic knowledge, my numerous shadowy connections to high-level bureaucrats to evaluate this issue:
The Supplemental is a crock of shit. It stinks on ice because, it doesn't, you know, actually end the Iraq War.
The war in Iraq is not just "bad". It's not just way too expensive, in lives and money. It's not just damaging to American interests.
The war in Iraq is evil. I do not believe that any person of conscience can ever assent to spend even one more dollar on this monstrous evil, regardless of the personal or political consequences.
The American people elected Democratic candidates in 2006 for pretty much one reason. After extensive polling and analysis, I've concluded that this reason was not to listen to the Democrats talk about maybe ending the war someday. They elected these candidates to actually end the war.
"But we don't have the votes in congress to end the war!" sayeth the "progressive" pundits. "We have to support this bill because it's the best we can get. We have to pass something, and we have to pass it right now."
I call bullshit.
Maybe we don't have the votes in congress to end the war. Who knows? No vote has been taken in Congress on any bill to actually end the war.
The Supplemental is—maybe—the bill that, after a vicious fight with
Pelosi woulda coulda shoulda... She could have strong-armed the Blue Dog democrats. She could have brought the fully funded withdrawal to the floor and let it get voted down. She could have pushed this fight past the day when we had enough money to withdraw the troops, and let Bush go on record that he himself would abandon the troops rather than end the war.
Bush is going to veto the supplemental. He's given us ample evidence that he doesn't give a rat's ass for public opinion. Bush is going to end up getting exactly what he wants. He knows now he can hold out for a "clean" supplemental, and he will. And he'll get it, too, wait and see.
The Republican party will back him. They know that they're going to lose in 2008, so they'll lose on principle; any inconvenienced legislators will become consultants and lobbyists with their fingers in the same corporate pies. They'll roar back in 2010, with war in Iraq still raging and expanded to Iran, and—more importantly—the Democrats' problem. We'll have Giuliani as president in 2012, and it will then be time for the most savage of paybacks, both on the people of the Middle East and the people of America. Giuliani is not.. ahem... the most forgiving of men.