It seems the democrats are trying to sneak through a resolution to end the war, using language that they hope is obscure enough that it's true meaning is hidden, but Obey let the cat out of the bag arguing with anti-war protesters who he claimed kept "screwing it up" by publicising what they were trying to do while protesting it.
The anti-war left posted an interesting clip on YouTube this week, an ambush of Congressman Obey in the halls of the House or Representatives. A lot of people are entertained by Obey, a staunch critic of the war from day one, being attacked by anti-war people for not doing enough. At one point he even calls them several names normally heard only from the likes of Ann Coulter.
I actually felt sorry for Obey. The questioners used one of their typical bait-and-switch tactics, asking about the injured soldiers in order to force him to stay so they could ambush him on secret camera about his supplemental. If you watch the beginning, you will see how the 2nd person walks past Obey and corrals his staffer to leave Obey alone with the "distraut woman" while a 3rd person filiming ducks the camera down until Obey has his back turned and can't see it.
But there is a very interesting thing Obey said during the tape, starting around 5 minutes into the video. He says clearly "We don't have the votes", meaning they don't have the votes on the floor for an open resolution which ends the war. Then he says "We do have the votes if you guys quit screwing it up".
The Democrats know they can't get a straight, open vote to end the war. But they hope that by burying just the right language in the supplemental, they can trick people into voting to end the war without having to say it.
Unfortunately, the anti-war left doesn't trust them anymore, and so the anti-war protesters are attacking the bill because the "end the war" part is so-well hidden they don't understand it. Obey has to explain it to them, but in doing so he lets the cat out of the bag.
It won't matter, Bush won't sign a bill establishing timetables for the end of a war because you can't possibly know when you will finally defeat your enemy. And he should veto this monstrosity anyway -- it's supposed to fund the military, and it's got over 10 BILLION dollars of democrat add-ons for stuff not associated with the war, and which is not paid for under the Democrats new "pay-go" rules.
This includes money for Lousiana to try to buy back the democrat votes before the next election.
Playing politics with war -- I had hoped that once the Democrats were in power, at least they would accept their responsibility for this country.