So George W. Bush has vetoed a supplemental spending bill for his war of choice, because it contained a tepid timeline for withdrawal. Gee, I guess that means he doesn't want any money for the war he started without need, and which he fucked up so bad it is now impossible to continue much less win. Because let's face it, Democrats would be truly stupid to cave in to the Shrub on setting timelines for ending the war--a promise they'd break at the cost of next year's elections. And while they may be weak, frightened and more concerned with the politics of convenience than in doing what's right, stupid is one thing they are not.
In the stare-down over funding George W. Bush's war, the Shrub is the one in a position to blink first. He knows that as long as no spending bill passes, he'll get no funding at all to continue it. And then he'll have to begin withdrawing troops, or risk the ire of a very angry public for abandoning them there with no equipment or pay. No one is fooled anymore into believing Bush supports the military, after Walter Reed and cuts to the V.A., and having short-changed them on body armor and training (among other things). All he can do is blame Democrats for doing what he himself has done unrestrained for four years. Now that something resembling grownups are in charge of Congress, he is throwing a temper tantrum.
Here's what Democrats should do: pass a firm timeline for withdrawal in the House of Representatives, say by August of this year, and then go public saying that since Bush vetoed the last spending bill it must mean he's ready to end the war. They should also say to the Senate if that body doesn't pass such a bill intact, then no more spending bills on the Iraq war will be brought up, and the House will not pass any bill from the Senate continuing to fund the war--either way, funding for the war will be cut off. Bush has a choice, he can either sign a bill funding an orderly withdrawal from Iraq, or be responsible for leaving our soldiers over there to find their own way back.
That's what Democrats ought to do. For six years, Bush and his Republican bitches in Congress mismanaged this war to the point that even achieving their aim of establishing a global empire run by the U.S. is now impossible. They wrote blank checks to contractors favored by the regime, who took the money and defrauded both our country and our military. Passing a spending bill that actually supplies our soldiers with what they need to stay alive, and get whatever job it is they're supposed to be doing over there done, is something Congress is duty-bound to do. But since the Shrub wants to throw a temper tantrum, then let him get no money at all for his war. True, he can still veto spending bills knowing there aren't enough votes in Congress to overrule him. But neither can he get another blank check. In this, Democrats are in a rare position to make him back down and do as he is told.
The whole debate over war funding can be summed up in the following analogy: a spoiled child receives his usual birthday present, but because the wrapper is blue instead of red, refuses the gift. Well, since he doesn't want what's inside just because he doesn't like the wrapper, why give it to him at all then? Return the present for a refund, and let him scream his fool head off. Better yet, bend him over your knee and spank him, then send him to bed without any supper.
(In other news, Bush's illegal wiretapping is running into a stumbling block. It seems more senators are balking at the notion of letting the dictator spy on Americans without cause or warrant.)