Don't Make Us Hold Our Breath Until We Pass Out

Ah, elections, those regularly scheduled bloodless revolutions every democratic society engages in, where the voice of the people replaces bombs and bullets, and the direction of a country is changed by the flick of a lever rather than the clash of armies. And who emerges from this semi-yearly exercise in mob rule? Leaders that's who. Leaders who the people call out to for strength, wisdom and the courage to bring this country out of the darkness.

Unfortunately, this time we got democrats. Hey, nobody said the system was perfect.

Two leading Senate Democrats are seeking to dispel concerns that a nonbinding resolution on Iraq doesn't go far enough, saying it would make a strong statement to president Bush that a troop increase is wrong. "He didn't listen to the Intelligence Services; he didn't listen to his generals; he didn't listen to just about everyone his father could get to figure a way for him to get out of this mess; and he didn't listen to the voters. But he'll listen now because we wrote the resolution in all caps," said Michigan Senator Carl Levin.

The proposal is completely toothless and would have no effect on money for troops. It states that "it is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq, and if you go ahead with this you're a big poopy head and we won't sit with you at lunch."

"It will be a very powerful message if a bipartisan majority of the Congress say that they disagree with the increased military involvement in Iraq," said Levin.

"Ah, we stopped listening to the Congress three years ago," countered White House Press Secretary Tony Snowjob. "We just need them to sign the checks and they can get back to their golf games."

Division over whether Democrats should push a stronger measure could spell defeat for the resolution, Levin cautioned. "Lord knows we don't want to do anything that might actually affect the president's policies. He'll send Cheney back up here. That guy's whack."

Bush, meanwhile, says in a new interview that the best way to convince skeptics "that this makes sense is to ignore them and pretend that it works. That makes it consistent with my other policies."

Asked in an interview whether Iraq would be a problem after he leaves office in January 2009, (which is 710 days away, but who's counting?) Bush said: "My war on terror will be a problem for the world. Presidents after me will be confronting ... an enemy that would like to strike the United States again, especially after all I've done to tick them off these last few years."

Bush is expected to address the Iraq war in his State of the Union speech Tuesday and renew his calls to work together with Democrats on a bipartisan way to do what he wants. "Well, if by 'democrats' you mean Joe Lieberman," Snowjob said.

Biden said despite other proposals that might actually accomplish something, there was overwhelming bipartisan support in Congress to take the easy way out. "Congress has to do what it does best," Biden said.