Dems learn a lesson in politics

They want desperately to gain authority on Iraq, the problem is they can't. They've tried non-binding resolutions which failed, and now they're looking to put some kind of timetable on the war, and pull in some of W's powers. But political reality is stuffing them. Say's Hill,

"It's a very frustrating time right now. We still don't have the votes."

And that's just for the 60 needed to bring it to the floor, when W veto's that sucker, they'll need 66.

So what's the lesson? It's much, much harder to undo a law you don't like than to let it pass in the first place. Too many people feel that its OK if a bad law passes because you can just change, but they don't understand the math. It takes 51 to pass a law without real opposition. It takes 60 to pass it with opposition, and 66 to pass it with a veto. Said differently, something that barely squeaks by and passes with a marginal vote of 1 (51) needs 9 more votes to undo, or 15 with a veto (you have to garner 30% more votes to override a veto) its just not that easy, and is hugely important in political strategy. The extra vote hurdle is why you have to fight bad laws in the beginning, before the hurdle of the extra votes kicks in. If the Dem's had the moxie they could have worked to keep the War powers provisions where they belong, with Congress, and they could now be acting on both their promises and the peoples expectations. But that would have required making a stand, which just isn't their strong suit.

As it stands, their earlier cowardice is leading to their current impotence.