Troop Funding Spin

Glenn Greenwald, picking up on Jonathan Alter (who was picking up on Greenwald in the first place) helps clarify the most important aspect of political spin success enjoyed by the White House and Republican Party vis-a-vis funding the Iraq war:

Both of the premises which Alter sets forth here are correct: (a) de-funding does not even arguably constitute "endangerment or abandonment of the troops," but (b) "Americans have been convinced that it does." And therein one finds what is the most extraordinary and telling fact of our political landscape. Namely, our Iraq war policy was just determined, in large part if not principally, by a complete myth: that de-funding proposals constitute an abandonment or, more ludicrously still, "endangerment" of the troops.

Emphasis mine. This is another in a series of "wins" the White House has enjoyed over Democratic leaders, despite the overwhelming returns of the 2006 mid-term election that turned the country blue. No matter what the public polls say, no matter how elections turn out, the White House and Republican leadership have simply been able to reduce the matter most effectively to a visceral level. Until the Democratic leadership finds a way to counter this, owning the intellectual high ground will continue to prove meaningless. Despite huge losses in Congress due to widespread corruption, cronyism and moral failure, Republicans still manage to hang on to the moral high ground, absurd as it may be, when it comes to the war.

Greenwald's whole post is here. It's a good one.