Date Certain Failure

OK, sports fans, lets take a look at the scoreboard:

Slow-Bleed Strategy--not happening
Dorgan Budget plan--barely made it out of the starting gate
DeFund the War--Not even tried
DeAuthorize the War--not even tried
Non-Binding Resolution--Passed, but who cares
Date Certain Timetable--the jury is still out

The Democrats continue to search for a strategy to end the war in Iraq, but can't seem to muster one that will unite their fractured caucus. They are now trying to add a deadline for withdrawal into the appropriations request.

Less than an hour after Democratic leaders propsed the solution, Minority Leader John Boehner attacked the plan on the most common leg--that it would telegraph our intentions to the enemy.

But the problem is that despite the belief aired by Rep. Lynn Woolsey:

"It's hard to put myself in their place," Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said of her party's conservatives. "It's clear that on Nov. 7, voters said, 'Democrats, we think you will be bold. You will change course for us in Iraq.' "

, Democrats are still stuck in a situation where the margin is just too close. The problem is the party's Blue Dog Caucus:

Because Republicans have stood remarkably united against the Democratic effort, the loss of just a handful of Democratic votes could lead to an embarrassing public defeat. At least a dozen of the 43 conservative "Blue Dogs," who worry about the "soft-on-defense" stigma that has haunted the party, could bolt if Democrats move toward withdrawal too aggressively. But dozens of antiwar Democrats say they cannot support legislation that is too meek.

"There's a fine line that I hope will not be blurred between micromanaging the war and assuring accountability," said Rep. Stephanie Herseth (S.D.), a Blue Dog leader. "I don't think we should be overreacting to public opinion polls."

The vote margin is just too thin.

But with a date certain withdrawal plan, the Democrats appear to be tackling yet another political non-starter as a plan. The President has the high ground on this because he can veto any appropriations bill that includes a time table and have the votes to sustain the veto. Furthermore, he will have the moral high ground in that he can claim that despite all their bloviating, the Democrats don't really support the troops.

The longer they try, the sooner the Democrats will run out of options on the Iraq war. They don't have the mandate they believed they had in November, in fact they never had the mandate Woolsey thinks they had. The more it drags out, the sooner the Democrats will have to take the step they are trying to avoid, that is actually voting to defund the war, the only Constitutional option they have. But taking that step means in all likelihood an immediate withdrawal, the political consequences of which they cannot tolerate in the run up to the 2008 election.