The Senate on Thursday will move to jumpstart negotiations on Iraq War spending as lawmakers in both parties stress the need to clear a bill that President Bush can sign by Memorial Day.

I'm wary of copyright violations (in this apparently post-fair use America), so I'll try to minimize direct quotation. But here's three more paragraphs, from bipartisan hell:

Unlike the first war spending proposal (HR 1591) -- which had minimal Republican input and which Bush vetoed May 1 -- Democrats are working this time with Republicans and the White House to reach a deal. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., affirmed their commitment Wednesday to providing a bill that Bush will sign.

"Sen. Reid and I agree that we ought to complete the job before Memorial Day," said McConnell, who also noted that 100 days had passed since Bush requested the money. "And that includes getting a presidential signature."

When asked whether he expects that the next proposal they send Bush will be something the president will sign, Reid replied: "The answer is yes, of course. And we're going to have some heavy negotiations."

The article is permeated with the stench of Republican-subservient bipartisanship. Oh yes, how wonderful, House Republican Conference Chairman Adam H. Putnam of Florida welcomes the moves in the Senate. Gosh I'm glad my Harry is pleasing all the right people. And for such a good cause, 50 more weeks of killing Iraqis and getting our troops blown up for fighting Iraqi sovereignty.

And about the defeated Reid-Feingold bill, as I said yesterday that is already being played as 'looking real peacenik for our base as we move on to doing the adult, bipartisan thing, approving $$$$ for 50 more weeks of death'. You get the idea from this:

After the votes [yesterday in the Senate], Democrats sought to make the case that most senators had now voted to change strategy in Iraq.

John Kerry, D-Mass., said that "the significance of these votes are that a majority of the United States Senate is now on record as wanting a change; not all in agreement as to what it will be, but Harry Reid and the conference will now hammer that out."

And even more so from the following, which CQ indicates are the feelings of Chuck Schumer:

Regardless of what happens on the war supplemental, Democrats said they would use other bills as vehicles to debate Iraq in the future.

Boy oh boy, thanks Chucky, the Democratic Party's antiwar base really really wants more and more vehicles to debate Iraq in the future! That's what we worked our asses off in 2006 to put Democrats in Congress for, to do nothing but provide years more of hot air and Iraq death.

On the other, non-sarcastic hand, why doesn't Congress send Bush the short-leash House bill. Bush would then have to decide to sign it and fund the troops with votes required on new funding in July and September, or veto it and then Bush has defunded his occupation all by himself. That's the way to get us out by Christmas, and yeah I do love the sound of that.

Let's pressure the bastards! Call or write your Senator now!