'D' in Democrats Means Do-Nothing

Lamer than a lame duck, according to the San Jose Mercury News.

Of course, it's all due to George W. Bush's truculent obstruction.

Naturally, the GOP has to worry about the dreaded backlash for stopping all the pie-in-the-sky joy the Democrat mandate promised us.

When the Democrats won control of Congress a year ago, they promised bold new leadership. Things would change, they said. They had a mandate.

But they didn't have the votes to stand up to veto threats by Bush and filibusters by Senate Republicans. They didn't have the bold new leadership, either. A year later, Congress is lamer than the lame-duck president.

On the Democrats' No. 1 issue, the war in Iraq, it's been a year of defeat and surrender. They were going to "bring the troops home." Instead, President Bush sent more troops to Iraq. The "surge," coupled with a new counter-insurgency strategy, has led to a sharp decline in military and civilian deaths. All attempts to link war funding to a withdrawal timetable fizzled. Giving up completely, Congress passed $70 billion in no-strings war funding before the Christmas recess.

Democratic leaders blame their impotence on Bush's obstinacy. Bush didn't compromise. He didn't have to.

Democrats talked about limiting the excesses of the Patriot Act, banning cruel CIA interrogation tactics and closing the Guantánamo Bay internment camp. Didn't happen.

Instead, Congress authorized warrantless surveillance for six months by passing the Protect America Act before the August recess. Democrats were forced to push discussion on making the surveillance rules permanent into January. Bush will likely win this one, too.

Must suck getting repeatedly rolled by such a dummy, eh Nancy?