But the answer may not matter because House Democrats have decided to lard the supplemental appropriations bill with billions in pork to sell their troop-withdrawal gimmicks. "Included in the legislation," reported the Washington Post, "is a lot of money to help win support. The price tag exceeds the president's war request by $24 billion ..." That number includes giveaways for spinach farmers and money for peanut storage. Back when Democrats were in the minority, they would have denounced this as piggybacking pork on the troops.
When Obey was confronted by antiwar activists, they demanded to know why it was taking so long to end the war. He responded that "idiot liberals" need to understand the complexities of legislating. That doesn't sound arrogant and out of touch at all.
Forget the war for a minute. What's the second most important issue for liberals today? Global warming, of course. For example, Sen. John Kerry claims that he's not running for president in'08 so that he can dedicate himself to the issues of Iraq and climate change. John Edwards says global warming will make world war look like heaven. Hollywood donors who hate the prospect of sweating in greenhouse gases as they walk to the gangway of their private jets think that global warming is the defining issue of our age.
So now's the time to solve global warming, right? For years, we've been subjected to charges that President Bush "refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol." Well, guess what? Bush couldn't sign Kyoto. It was already signed under the previous president, who immediately shoved it in his desk drawer. (Bush didn't sign the Treaty of Versailles either, by the way.)
If Kyoto's such a priority, why hasn't Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid fought to take it up? There's a strong legal case that once signed, a treaty is automatically in the Senate's court. But you don't hear Reid fighting to take up Kyoto even though it's our best hope to combat the Most Dangerous Threat Facing Mankind.
Of course, Kyoto would never pass even a Democrat-controlled Senate because it would wreak havoc on the economy. Other Democratic betrayals in the making face similar problems. Democrats could never repeal the Defense of Marriage Act or the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But that's the ironic part. Republicans went soft because doing what the base wanted was too damn hard. It seems the same fate awaits Democrats.
NYT Journalist Wonders: "Free Speech Aside" Why Would Anyone Hold A Contest to Draw Muhammed? | Katie Pavlich