The front page of today's San Francisco Chronicle features a piece by Marc Sandalow on the battle brewing over Bush's expected plan to escalate in Iraq (known as the McCain Doctrine, "When you're hip deep in shit, dig faster, until you're in over your head.")
If the president, as expected, announces his intention to deploy as many as 20,000 additional U.S. troops in Iraq, he may encounter widespread political and public defiance.
It will quickly test the new Democratic majority's capacity to stand up to the commander in chief in a time of war, and the ability of the legislative branch to seize control of the White House's controversial foreign policy. [...]
"We can see a major clash coming between a Democratic Congress and the administration on this very, very fundamental issue,'' said Bruce Riedel, a former member of Bush's National Security Council and now a fellow at the Brookings Institution. "Not only do most Democrats on the Hill oppose the surge or have serious doubts about it, but more and more Republicans have doubts about the wisdom of the surge.''
While "most Democrats" are smart enough to fight with Pelosi to oppose the escalation, there is one Democrat who already put together the necessary mechanics for such an escalation.
The problem for Bush (beyond the fact this is ridiculous) is that it is physically difficult, there simply aren't enough troops. Some are now saying the escalation may only number 9,000 because the early numbers floated of 30,000 to 40,000 were impossible.
Which is why talk of an escalation quickly resulted in the headline, Bush comes to Tauscher's way of thinking.
The problem isn't that we don't have enough troops, the problem is that we have too many troops in Iraq. But just as he did in the run-up to the war that Tauscher voted for, Bush is playing her as a fool.
Will she keep digging or will she finally start listening to people like Speaker Pelosi who have been right from the start?
