By Brian Beutler
The Guardian asked me to flesh out the below post on the supplemental for their newish site Comment is Free, so I'll link to that, because I think--having more time devote to clarity and background--I made the point more clearly.
Keep in mind that, though it's impossible to disentangle theDemocratic strategy on Iraq vis a vis Iraq from their strategy on Iraqvis a vis elections in America, these people are on record. Reid andNancy Pelosi both have stated their personal positions on the war.Positions that happen to be identical to Kucinich's. So when peoplecriticize Democrats for thinking of their own electability whenadvancing their slow poking strategy, they should keep in mind threethings: 1). That it's no secret who believes what about the war; 2).That because both houses are so evenly divided, building consensus isextremely important; and 3). That the strategy is itself notparticularly popular.
This isn't, to me, about party solidarity. I just happen tothink that the Democratic leadership is doing this because they knowtheir options well, and they have concluded that this is the only onethat might possibly work before Bush leaves office. And at the veryleast, nobody will be able to say they completely ignored the issue.
Cross posted at Brian Beutler.
