Not to bore you

I just read this Op-Ed piece in the Times which left me feeling really frustrated. Mainly because of the silliness of the premise. I wouldn't be surprised to see something like this on CNN or Fox News, but the New York Times op-ed page does not usually print such garbage.

Ostensibly, the piece suggests that since the Democrats now "control" congress they have all the power they need to stop the war in Iraq, bring the troops home. The article suggests that they haven't used this power because they are in basic agreement with the Bush administration and meanwhile they are happy to see the republicans bear the brunt of the public's discontent.

This simplistic rationalization overlooks the fact that the Democrats "majority" was not large enough to even push through a non-binding criticism of the President's ridiculous Surge.

Congress may be full of lilly-livered equivocators on both sides of the aisle, but the Republican party has made following Bush's lead a requirement for all their members. Until enough individual senators break free of the Bush team's leash, anti-war legislation is DOA.

A lot can happen in two years and I suspect that after the Surge, we'll see the president quietly agree with the major proposals being offered from the Democrats. Meanwhile, the democrats know there's a treasure-trove of sleaze underlying the President's 6 years in office. If they chose to pursue (which I think they will) all the avenues of corruption, Bush will be fondly dreaming of the days of 35% approval. And the lawmakers that have been clinging to Bush's makeshift raft will perhaps finally decide to take their chances on the open-seas.

The anti-war crowd (most everyone) is impatient for results. Unfortunately, the changes, if they're on their way at all, are only going to come after months and perhaps years of painful and occasionally outrageous political games.