AP:

Senate Democratic leaders on Wednesday rejected the call by the top U.S. general in Iraq for a reduction of up to 30,000 U.S. troops in Iraq by next summer, saying it does not go far enough.

“This is unacceptable to me, it’s unacceptable to the American people,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Unacceptable. It would be truly delicious, wouldn’t it, if Harry Reid meant that the Democratic party, acting on behalf of the American people, was not going to accept it. That the Democratic party was simply going to refuse to fund the Iraq war until Bush produced an acceptable withdrawal plan.

But it doesn’t look like Reid means anything like that. And I’m not just going by the evidence of past cave-ins and folds.

Just yesterday, Reid gave us evidence that he knows how to express firm, unshakable resolve. On the subject of Buttercheeks‘ replacement — or more accurately, the rumors that Theodore “Odious” Olson is at the top of Bush‘s shortlist — Reid held nothing back:

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid vowed on Wednesday to block former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson from becoming attorney general if President George W. Bush nominates him to replace Alberto Gonzales.

Congressional and administration officials have described Olson as a leading contender for the job as chief U.S. law enforcement officer, but Reid declared, “Ted Olson will not be confirmed” by the Senate.
[...]
“I will do everything within my power as majority leader to stop Ted Olson from being confirmed,” Reid told Reuters.

But Bush’s Iraq strategy draws only a common or garden variety “unacceptable”. If you still manage to retain your youthful, glass-half-full optimism, you might be heartened by such weak rhetoric. But I’m here to cynically assure you that, in forecasting circles, they call that the writing on the wall. Or, if you prefer a different metaphor, the accountant who lives inside me is snorting and going: “Proforma opposition!”