Hello everyone. While I would love to use my daily diary to promote John Edwards for President, or Greg Stumbo for Ky Senate in 08, a far more pressing issue has come up. I know there are several dedicated Kossacks that will carry the banner for myself and fellow Edwards supporters today. I would just like to say that I hope anyone that is interested in defeating Mitch McConnell in 08 to go to Greg Stumbo's site, Kentucky's current A.G., who has done an excellent job in that role and learn more. Here is the link:

http://www.stumbo2008.com/

Now that our friends in the Senate have finally left the Capitol for the recess, we can use the moment of quiet reflection to work on a realistic understanding of the options that the Dems have in proposing Congressional measures on Iraq.

The last cut here was Chris's piece yesterday, which suggested that the big names in the Senate touting different plans should get together to work up a single plan which could be sold to the voters. (Something I think would be worthwhile.)

And also suggested that

the Murtha-Pelosi plan...actually has a real chance of passing

It's not a surprise at all, given earlier comments of Harry and other senior Dem senators (my piece from Friday).

So take his comments on CNN today as just confirmation that nothing much has moved following the House and Senate votes on Friday and yesterday.

A few days ago, Jonathan cited a recent Pew survey for its results on Iran.

Their stuff is always worth mooching around in, and, as early as page 5, pulls up this dispiriting stat:

On the question Will the US achieve its goals in Iraq? the nation is split down the middle (47-46, in fact).

The partisan split, however, is nowhere near as clear cut as you - OK, I - thought.

In this morning's media, I see signs that, while S Con Res 63 (House voting at 1600 today, according to the Note) is a no-brainer for all (almost all?) Dem MCs, the Murtha Proviso may be a different matter.

Few around here will be staggered to learn (LA Times piece) the name of one doubter:

many Democrats worry about the consequences of trying to block the troop increase by tying strings to the supplemental war appropriations bill Bush has requested. These Democrats warn that Republicans will accuse the party of undermining the military because it is difficult to isolate funding for the troop increase without affecting military personnel already deployed.

"It is a Gordian knot," said California Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Alamo), who supports the nonbinding resolution.

Not often that I bring hope on a topic on which Stoller is downbeat!

It's a small hope, in which I place no trust at all. But it deserves consideration.

Stoller quotes Greenwald, taken as something of a sage on these matters, saying that

it is clear that Congressional Democrats are not working at all towards the goal of forcing an end to the war.

Jonathan's piece yesterday bugged me a little:

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is set to run newspaper advertisements across Oregon and New Hampshire blasting Gordon Smith and John Sununu, the two states' respective junior Republican Senators who are up for reelection next fall, for their failed leadership -- specifically the fact that they both voted against beginning a debate on America's Iraq policy last week.

First, there's the need to make the connection in the minds of Joe Sixpack between voting against cloture on the motion to proceed on S 470 and supporting the war, really.

Part, I'd say, of the jaundiced view Sixpack takes of Congress as a whole is the sort of fancy juggling with improbable rules that goes on there: the I voted for it before I voted against it thing. Or, put another way, senators will be senators.

Although no one likes an extended trip through the medina of Congressional lore and practice more than I do, the hard fact is that figuring what to best do with a bill always starts with the numbers.

The Senate numbers on Iraq appear to be these: around 25 favoring a withdrawal timetable, a tad below 60 favoring Warner-Levin, a tad over - Novak says 70 - favoring Gregg.

So far as I know, we have no suggestion of the likely count for defunding, either of the surge or the war as a whole; I shouldn't be surprised if that came out as less than for the timetable.