EJ Dionne's column, and I love EJ, is replete with many misconceptions and wrongheaded thinking, some of it his, some of it attributed to Democrats. I want to start with Speaker Pelosi's delusion:

Pelosi's case is that the war's congressional opponents have already helped move the debate by passing antiwar measures and by prying Republicans loose from the president's policy. "It is just a matter of time," she says, before Republicans can "no longer stay with the president.

This is a bad joke. Speaker, you pried no one loose and you never will. Until you get that right, you have no chance to effectively end the Iraq Debacle. This is quite dioscouraging to hear. Speaker Pelosi seems not to get it at all. The Republicans will never abandon Bush on Iraq. You must formulate your strategy accordingly.

Muqtada Al Sadr demanded US withdrawal from Iraq today in his first public appearance in four months:

The powerful Iraqi cleric Moktada al- Sadr surfaced in his home base of Kufa in southern Iraq today, delivering a sermon in a local mosque after what American intelligence officials called a four-month sojourn in Iran.

The cleric, addressing a large crowd amid heavy security, called for American forces to leave Iraq and for the Iraqi government to make sure that the Americans leave as soon as possible. He called for and end to fighting between his own Mahdi Army and Iraqi forces and police, asking his followers to conduct peaceful demonstrations instead.

. . . Mr. Sadr’s appearance came as the American military announced today that six more soldiers had died in Iraq, five on Thursday and one on Tuesday, according to Reuters. April was the worst month this year for the American military since the invasion, with 104 soldiers killed. About 90 have been killed in May so far.

Not a new position for Sadr, but the timing makes for an interesting development to say the least.

After the passage of the original House Iraq Supplemental, the much lionized measure, in response to the praise the bill received, I wrote:

Chris Bowers articulates his [analysis]:

The more I think about it, at least in the short term, both camps in the progressive side of this debate will actually get what they want. This bill will pass the House, but it will also never pass into law. . . . At the same time, those of us now favoring the bill will get what we wanted: headlines showing Democrats trying to end the war, but being thwarted by Republicans. . . . We all won.

Actually, in the short term, I have always accepted this point, IF it played out that way. But it won't.

. . . The very same pressures that forced the capitulation to the Blue Dogs will force further capitulations along the way starting with the Senate, IF a bill is to be approved. . . .

Ironically, unlike most everyone else, I am not so discouraged about what can happen next. For I believe, after this hard lesson, for Democrats in Congress, for progressive activists, for the Netroots, we can now go forward with a PRAGMATIC, realistic plan to end the Iraq debacle AND play smart politics. Yes, from these ashes should rise the Reid/Feingold/McGovern/Dodd/Kerry/ Edwards/Obama/Clinton/Boxer, et al. NOT funding after a date certain framework.

A New York Times - CBS poll finds public support for the Iraq War at its lowest point since the invasion in 2003.

Sixty-one percent of Americans say the United States should have stayed out of Iraq and 76 percent say things are going badly there, including 47 percent who say things are going very badly, the poll found.

....President Bush’s approval ratings remain near the lowest of his more than six years in office. Thirty percent approve of the job he is doing over all, while 63 percent disapprove.

More Americans — 72 percent — now say that “generally things in the country are seriously off on the wrong track” than at any other time since the Times/CBS News poll began asking the question in 1983. The number has slowly risen since January 2004. Then, 53 percent said the country was “seriously off on the wrong track,” and by January of this year it was 68 percent.

If we don't cut off funding, how do we ensure the war ends? What's so difficult about bringing the troops home by a date certain and refusing to fund Iraq war spending after that date?

The latest New York Times poll shows a strong majority of Americans favor allowing undocumented residents to obtain legal status:

Taking a pragmatic view on a divisive issue, a large majority of Americans want to change the immigration laws to allow illegal immigrants to gain legal status and to create a new guest worker program to meet future labor demands, the poll found.

Two-thirds of those polled said illegal immigrants who had a good employment history and no criminal record should gain legal status as the bill proposes, which is by paying at least $5,000 in fines and fees and receiving a renewable four-year visa.

The respondents weren't specifically asked about the compromise legislation.

More...

Hillary Clinton's campaign has released this statement explaining why she voted against the Iraq funding bill:

"Tonight I voted against the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill because it fails to compel the President to give our troops a new strategy in Iraq. I believe that the President should begin a phased redeployment of our troops out of Iraq and abandon this escalation. I fully support our troops, and wish the President had followed the will of the people and signed the original bill we sent which both funded the troops and set a new course of phased redeployment. But the President vetoed Congress's new strategy and so Congress must reject the President's failed policies. I will also continue to press with Senator Byrd for our legislation to end the authorization of the war in Iraq.

While I am deeply disappointed that the supplemental does not provide for a new course in Iraq, I want to recognize the many worthy parts of this bill: funding to help those sickened in the aftermath of 9/11, additional relief for Katrina and Rita victims, homeland security funds for high-threat cities like New York City, resources to protect parts of New York affected by recent flooding, $650 million for the State Children's Health Insurance Program, and the first federal minimum wage increase in ten years. I support these measures but cannot support this Emergency Supplemental which will not change our course in Iraq."

In an increasing sign of Mexico's reliance on and willingness to cooperate with U.S. law enforcement, Mexico has been expanding its wiretapping -- without court orders. Funding for the program comes from the United States.

The expansion comes as President Felipe Calderon is pushing to amend Mexico's constitution to allow officials to tap phones without a judge's approval in some cases.

The $3 million program is the Communications Intercept System.

The system would allow authorities to track cell-phone users as they travel, according to the contract specifications. It would include extensive storage capacity and allow authorities to identify callers by voice. The system, scheduled to begin operation within the next month, was paid for by the U.S. State Department and sold by Verint Systems Inc., a politically connected company based in Melville, N.Y., that specializes in electronic surveillance.

Documents describing the upgrade suggest that the U.S. government could have access to information derived from the surveillance. Officials of both governments declined to comment on that possibility.

More

Update: 7:19 pm by TL: The Senate has also passed the bill, by a vote of 80 to 14. Hillary and Obama both voted against it.

Update [2007-5-24 19:0:28 by Big Tent Democrat]: The Iraq Supplemental passes 280-142. Link to the roll call vote. I think all the nays were Dems. So the Dems split 142-89 I believe.

The Debate on the Capitulation Bill, as Kos coined it, starts now on C-Span.

Obey looks beaten down.

Basically Obey's argument is we don't have a veto-proof majority. And how that changes for the next appropriation process? It doesn't.

What Obey admits is that the entire House Supplemental process was a joke form the beginning. I agree with him on that. Time to adopt the NOT funding option Rep. Obey.

Update [2007-5-24 17:31:7 by Big Tent Democrat]: The Floor Manager Obey will vote against the Capitulation Bill, joining the Speaker of the House in opposing the bill that Rahm emanuel argued was a great victory. That said, good for Obey.

More...

Democrats followed through today with plans to ask for a no-confidence vote on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

"It is the sense of the Senate that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales no longer holds the confidence of the Senate and of the American people," it reads. Chiefly sponsored by Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Dianne Feinstein of California, the measure contains no preamble setting out the reasons behind the resolution, an omission made in hopes of drawing more votes.

The vote is scheduled for mid-June.

Happy 66th birthday to Bob Dylan today.

The times have changed, just not enough.

I'm still standing on the pavement, thinking about the Government .

If you want to chime in, here's the list.

Action Alert just received by e-mail from the Anti-Arab Discrimination Committee:

Cornyn Amendment Would Allow Use of Secret Evidence

Thursday, May 24, 2007…Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) has introduced an amendment (#1148) to the on-going immigration debate that would deny lawful permanent residents the opportunity to become U.S. citizens based on secret evidence.

....Senators are voting on this amendment as early as 12:15 EST. As this late breaking amendment has just been added and will be voted on very shortly, we are asking everyone to call rather than email their senate offices. The US Capitol operator is (202) 224-3121.

The details:

• Cornyn’s Amendment denies lawful permanent residents the opportunity to become U.S. citizens based on secret evidence:

• This amendment gives the Attorney General unreviewable discretion to use secret evidence to determine if an alien is ‘described in’ the national security exclusions within immigration law.

• A person applying for naturalization could have her application denied and she would never know the reason for the denial.

More...

Credit where credit is due, and today it goes to New Mexico Governor and presidential hopeful Bill Richardson, who says he will oppose the Immigration compromise because it is too onerous for immigrants:

Mr. Richardson initially said he would support the immigration compromise announced earlier this week. But on Wednesday, he said that after reading it in detail, he had decided to oppose it, saying the measure placed too great a burden on immigrants — tearing apart families that wanted to settle in the United States, creating a permanent tier of second-class immigrant workers and financing a border fence that Mr. Richardson had long opposed.

“This is fundamentally flawed in its current form, and I would oppose it,” he said. “We need bipartisanship, but we also need legislation that is compassionate. I’m not sure that this is.”

Thank you, Governor Richardson.

More....