David Obey Was (Sort of) Right

So lots of lefties are unhappy with the House and Senate measures on Iraq, and think the Democrats should be pushing for a funds cutoff measure. Fine; in an ideal world, something stronger would be preferable.

The thing to keep in mind, though, is that we're talking about purely symbolic differences. No proposal from Congress will actually succeed in limiting funds for Iraq. If it passed in the House, it would be filibustered in the Senate. If by some miraculous intervention by a magical power it passed in the Senate, it would be vetoed. It just isn't going to happen.

I think that's an essential bit of perspective in all this. Some people have adopted the position that anything short of cutting off funding is a betrayal, is 'selling out'. That's absurd; the practical impact of a stronger measure would be exactly the same as that of a weaker measure, which is to say no practical impact at all. We're arguing symbolism here.

Differences over tactics are not differences over principle. Liberals have a long and ignominious history of forgetting this; let's not make that mistake now.