In yesterday's post, The Zeitgeist on the War, DemFromCT suggested the possibility that the journalism elite might eventually catch up with the public's desire to see the US withdraw from Iraq. No doubt a shift in the media zeitgeist will take time, and be a one step forward, two steps back sort of process, but today the New York Times took one step forward, in an article detailing Harry Reid's plans for votes on Iraq, which have undergone a shift, with Reid's determination to press for real change in Iraq policy having solidified.
The article notes the reality we here all see too clearly: That on Iraq, at least, Joe Lieberman functions as a Republican, denying the Democrats even a notional majority. As Jon Tester says:
"Some folks may have anticipated that the war would be stopped the Wednesday after the Tuesday election," said Senator Jon Tester, Democrat of Montana. "But this is a complex situation that we’ve got in Iraq right now, and I think most of the people understand that we’re going to do the best we can do with what we have to work with."
A key challenge in the battle to pass more and better Iraq legislation will be getting the Republicans such as Lugar, Voinovich, and Domenici, who have recently called for changes in Iraq policy, to actually vote for such a change. But, acknowledging that "We haven't done enough," Reid appears to be planning a full-court press:
Mr. Reid said he now saw ending the war as a moral duty, and even if the Senate again falls short, he said, he would turn again and again to Iraq until either the president relents or enough Republicans join Democrats to overrule Mr. Bush.
"I think that each time these people vote to continue what’s going on in Iraq it is a bad, bad move for them and a worse move for our country," Mr. Reid said.
Reid's determination to push this issue is a good move for the Democrats and a better one for the country.