by user DNL
In November, the Democratic Party succeeded in fantastic fashion, taking both houses of Congress. Iraq was the litmus issue, as Bush's management (or lack thereof) worked as an effective talking point for Democratic hopefuls.
With a 32-vote majority in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi moved forward on Iraq. Her party introduced a bill which would set timetable tied based on Iraqi governmental goals, resulting in a U.S. troop withdrawal within 18 months.
Given the vote cushion and the mandate of the voters, one would think that Pelosi's charge -- "get this done!" -- would be an easy one. As leader of the Democratic house caucus, how difficult would it be for her to get 217 of her partymates on-board? That would be 93% of the Democratic house members, which, in many cases, would be a high number, but recall that a recent CNN poll suggests that over 90% of Democratic voters oppose the War.
In other words, this shouldn't be hard for Pelosi to pull off.
The difficulty, of course, is the appropriation side of the bill. It promises that spending on the Iraq War will continue through September, and there are a handful of blind liberal ideologues in the House who wish to scuttle the bill because it "doesn't go far enough." Of course, this lack of practicality not only harms the soldiers and Iraqis that the ideologues allegeldy are aiming to protect, but also their own party.
If Nancy Pelosi can't drive that point home, someone else has to take the reigns.