Maybe he'll be nice to us now?

Matt Stoller noticed the same thing I did: that the Dems capitulation on the Iraq supplemental bill is an echo of their capitulation on the original authorization of force against Iraq.

"Obviously it's a good move," said Democratic pollster Fred Yang. "It gives President Bush and Republicans one less thing to shoot at" during the upcoming recess week.

Once again the Democrats are ruled by consultants who think that playing defense is the best way of winning. But all this really does is reinforce the idea that Democrats won't fight for what they believe in. And if they won't fight for what they believe in then why should we (The American People) trust them to defend them against people who want to kill them?

The language of capitulation is clear: if you give up something in the belief that it will make an enemy treat you better you are a fool. Would Osama bin Laden be nicer to us if we give up something to him?

There's a reason why Republicans, for all their incompetence, corruption and general all around loopiness, still has an appeal for the voters: at least we know they will fight.

(Aside: I'm breaking my general rule of not using Republican talking points when describing Democrats because to do so only validates them. But when the Democrats live down to the negative portrayal the Republicans have made of them then there is really no choice but to point out how they are doing so.)