Why Reid-Feingold Is The Only Way To End the Iraq Debacle
Time's Karen Tumulty provides me all the evidence I need:
[T]he sense I'm getting from talking to leadership sources is that, in the face of the reality that they can't override the veto, they are ready to jettison the deadlines for troop withdrawal. Democrats figure they have public opinion on their side at the moment, but that they won't if this drags on too long. The public wants to end the war, but polls suggest most voters are not yet ready to cut off the funding.
The poll Tumulty cites is an endorsement of Reid-Feingold:
The April 23-26, 2007 panel survey finds <b.57% of Americans favoring "the U.S. setting a timetable for removing its troops from Iraq and sticking to that timetable regardless of what is happening in Iraq," while 39% favor the United States "keeping troops in Iraq as long as necessary to secure the country, even if that takes many more years."
Tumulty says most voters don't want to cut off the funding. What she fails to understand is that withdrawal is cutting off the funding. And Reid-Feingold is for withdrawal by the only means it can happen, by cutting off the funding on a date certain, April 1, 2008. This gives the funding for the troops. Heck it even gives Bush's surge a chance to work. You have 11 months Mr. President. That's it. This is a winning political strategy for ending the Debacle.
< Rashomon And The Netroots | Everybody Reads TalkLeft > |