They dems continue their spineless ways and have done a great job of tying themselves to the mistakes of the iraq war instead of it just on the repubs. They are so terrified of a commercial running in their town talking about how they don't support the troops, they'd probably let Bush invade Canada. It's cute how dems think the 08 is theirs no matter what.

Modern dictionaries need to add this as a new variant on the list of definitions for the word "compromise":

CAPITULATION

This then needs to be illustrated with a picture of a prominent Democratic "leader" such as Majority Leader Reid or Speaker Pelosi.

they are simply playing their part in the shadow play. I see those who are calling the dems cowardly, etc. are still hiding from the truth: we are ruled by one party with two heads, who put on a sham fight to give us the illusion of choice as they rule us in the name of the elite. the dems are not stupid: they are simply following the path best suited to corporate interests, just like the republicans. For a while I thought Nader might have been wrong about the Democrats, but really it was only Bush's incompetence that clouded the issue. I should have seen it when Gore did not contest the election in 2000. He said he didn't because he wanted us to have confidence in our system of government. I see now he didn't contest the election because he didn't want to rock the corporate boat. If one of the leading Democrats is elected, we will simply have a competent Bush [= coporate interest figurehead].

After all the crowing about the "mandate for change" the American people handed the Democrats in the November 2006 election, the only thing they seem capable of now is aiding and abetting Bush's criminal follies. Neither of the Democratic senators from my state nor the "Blue Dog" Democrat representing my congressional district can expect to receive my vote again. They've played me and their Democratic constituents for the sucker one time too many. They have betrayed the American people and deserve to be turned out of office.

Will Christopher Dodd be the next Mike Gravel? Gravel acted as a single Senator to filibuster the extension of the draft to support the Vietnam war. Will Dodd filibuster any funding that doesn't have a set time for withdrawal? Would enough Senate Democrats be crazy enough to side with the Republicans to end such a filibuster?

I will be watching this situation very carefully. My choice of candidate to support for the Democratic Presidential nomination will rest in large part on how the the current candidates vote and position themselves on this issue over the next few weeks.

Let's face it, that's all this is.

Bush equivocates, claiming he is waiting for recommendations from Petraeus, or the general du jour, which will be a) the dictated reiteration of Bush's own evaluation and "plan" written by the White House and not the commander in the field or b) a plan which, if it veers even an atom from his dictates, will be completely ignored or denounced before it even sees the light of day.

And so, over and over, we wait to see who will blink. With a Congress that puts on a vociferous show, and in the end takes a dive into the comfortable realm of "what else can we do, we don't have the votes."

What they can do is stop worrying about looking like the bad guy. Most of us don't believe the neocon label of "not supporting the troops", why is Congress still scared to make Bush step up to the plate and show once and for all that HE is the one "not supporting the troops"?

Note to Congress: Call his bluff. Make him stand up and shout who he really is. We're all behind you.

But know this...if you don't, there are e-mails arriving at my desk daily that show organizations intent on revoking the trust we placed in you.

We voted you in...we will vote you out. The sad thing is that none of you seem to care how many more dead kids will be returning to grief-stricken parents in the meantime.

GROW SOME GODDAM BALLS, DEMS, OR i'M VOTING FOR RALPH NADER COME FALL 2008, I SWEAR TO gOD.

I'm gonna call every Dem I can and say this very thing (my second sentence will be calmer and more cogent, I promise).

Don't think I won't.

Pickie Beecher, that you called for in your post. The balls to vote the corporate interests they truly represent. the balls to continue to lie and put on a charade for us that there is any real difference between them and the republicans. they are brave and intelligent in their design of pacifying the masses with a shadow play of democracy while they sell us down the river. Even criminals can be brave and intelligent, as this shows us.

Bush could write a plan for withdrawal; Congress would write a plan for withdrawal, but so what? You don't think that plan would become as big a sneering joke as the big benchmarks?

We have an alleged leader who thinks the Constitution is a piece of paper; do you think agreements and timetables and plans concerning Iraq are of any binding importance to him?

How did we come to an America like this? And how do we get out of it? I'd like to see a "plan" for that.

Any date for withdrawal that isn't a requirement will be ignored by the President. The Democrats haven't done anything that makes me think they will do anything to stop the occupation. As I've written several times before, the Democrats in congress are playing politics with the troops lives, just as surely as George Bush is.

Here's my prediction: The Democrats in congress won't stop funding the war until late next year. They are making sure that anything that goes wrong will be the Republican's "fault". They will stop the funding late enough that they can get an electoral "we stopped the war" bump and not be blamed for anything untoward that occurs.

Politicians are a cowardly lot.

And thanks to the Onion for the concept of the Arc d'Capitulation.