"Let’s make Iraq another Vietnam” should be the rallying call for Conyers (you’ll remember him from his pretend Presidential impeachment hearings last year) and his ilk.

Wonderful.  The “9-11 was an inside job” sign, along with the cops and ambulance worker with a stretcher, in the background are a nice touch.

Conyers is right on one thing, though.  The Constitution does give Congress the power to cut off funding for war.  It’s a check on the President’s power as commander-in-chief of the military.  But where Conyers goes off the tracks is where he asserts that the founders meant for that power to be used on a war like in Iraq, or with a President like Bush.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I don’t think the founders meant for Congressional appropriations powers to be used as a lever to force failure in war for no other reason than to make the President look like a fool.  Which is exactly what most Democrats are doing on Iraq.  They don’t care about the war in Iraq, they care about making the President and those who support him look foolish so that they can get the White House in 2008.  If forcing us to flee from Iraq like Congress forced us to flee from Vietnam accomplishes that goal, they’re good with it.

Conyers, though, at least has the courage of his convictions.  Unlike most of his Democrat colleagues who are busy issuing resolutions against the war even as they simultaneously promise to appropriate the military what it needs to carry out the war (and refuse to consider de-authorizing the war) Conyers has consistently been anti-war.  He voted against it in the start.  He’s voted against funding for it in the past.  Those are detestable stances to have, but at least he’s been open and consistent about them.