The Democrats again

I want to call your attention to an article called "Fractured: What the Dems Did on Iraq, What They Could've Done, What It Means". Here's how it gets started:

First, let's dispense with the nonsense once and for all. If Democrats like Joe Biden and John Murtha want to reinforce the notion that setting withdrawal deadlines is somehow "abandoning our troops," there's a simple way to fix that. Just insert a paragraph like this into your bill: "Troops shall be fully provided with all necessary resources while in the field of battle, and must be withdrawn from combat zones before being deprived of said resources." See? That wasn't hard.

Why didn't they do that this week? I can only come up with two possible explanations. The first is they cut a deal. Maybe these Dems negotiated with GOP legislators, perhaps with the best of intentions, to revisit the issue in September. The other explanation is that they're so terrified of being labeled "cut and run" that, even with more than 60% of voters behind them, they're afraid to take a stand.

Neither explanation is flattering. If they cut a deal, they did so with a group that has consistently broken such agreements in the past and is likely to do so again. If they're simply afraid, then they've let down the troops, the Iraqis, and the American people out of weakness.

And now look at this paragraph:

Whatever their motivation, the Democrats who caved this week didn't just reinforce the War Party's primary talking point. They also undercut their own two leading Presidential candidates, Sens. Obama and Clinton, who voted "no." Most gravely, they've fractured their own party base - a group whose opinion on the war is shared by most Americans.

It's that circular firing squad again. I would be so disillusioned if I weren't already sadly cynical when it comes to the Democratic Party.