Democrats Back Away From Iraq Plan

A boy stands in a street after a roadside bomb went off in central Baghdad, Iraq, Monday, Feb. 26, 2007. The bomb targeted a U.S. army convoy, police said. (AP Photo/Khalid Mohammed) (Khalid Mohammed - AP)

The Democrats' symbolic measure disapproving of Bush's troop buildup passed the House only to stall in the Senate. The House plan to place strict restrictions on war funding appears to lack enough support within Democratic ranks to succeed, and looks likely to be scaled back, considering Pelosi's latest comments. The Senate bid to narrow the 2002 resolution authorizing the war appears to lack enough votes to be approved, and action on it now is likely to be put off _ at least for the week.

The first signs of impatience among Democrats' allies are sprouting.

"The public is saying, 'We hired you to get out of Iraq _ now figure it out,'" said Tom Matzzie, Washington director of the anti-war group MoveOn.org. "There is a risk that without action, frustration boils over into anger."

Democrats argue that their failed efforts to thwart Bush's war plans will ultimately pay off by ratcheting up pressure for a change.

"The administration is increasingly isolated and they are increasingly at odds with where the American people are," said Jim Manley, a Reid spokesman. "We're going to keep on going at it until the administration changes course."

But Democrats also are worried about being at odds with public opinion as House and Senate leaders push divergent measures.

House Democrats, who enjoy a 32-seat majority, will try this week to determine if there is enough support among themselves to pass the Murtha plan. Senate Democrats will discuss whether to postpone action on the war reauthorization, as Reid suggested.

Bush told governors Monday that he looked forward to a "healthy debate" on Iraq, but warned Congress against limiting funding for the war or commanders' flexibility in waging it.

"I do not believe that someone is unpatriotic if they don't agree with my point of view. On the other hand, I think it's important for people to understand the consequences of not giving our troops the resources necessary to do the job," Bush said.

Democrats' troubles finding a strategy on the war reflect a wider lack of consensus among the public about what course to take in Iraq. AP-Ipsos polls show that while a clear majority are pessimistic about the war and oppose a buildup, most people do not support cutting funding for the troops.

Zbigniew Brzesinski, Jimmy Carter's former national security adviser, said Democrats "run the risk of losing momentum."

They would be better off pushing some simple policy statements that could garner Republican support _ such as opposition to establishing permanent bases in Iraq or to further expansion of the war _ than trying to find a way to tie Bush's hands, he said.

"One has to be very careful not to get involved in micromanaging a military engagement," Brzesinski added.

Bush still enjoys substantial advantage when it comes to trumpeting his message on the war, even though his image and clout suffered major blows in last fall's elections.

Democrats, by contrast, have a cacophony of voices _ including several presidential candidates _ weighing in on what to do next in Iraq.

"The party's not unified. Until you control the executive branch, you really don't have a party _ you have all these independent actors," Lawrence Korb, a Reagan administration Defense Department official, said of the Democrats' plight.