WaPo editorial hates on Murtha because he wants to pass legislation that will actually do something. And because Murtha dared to say that the non-binding resolution (which Harry "The Gambler" Reid failed to move forward in the Senate today) is pointless.

The House vote does matter: It ought to increase the pressure on Mr. Bush and the Iraqi government to follow through on their pledges to accompany the military campaign with tangible steps toward political accords and economic reconstruction.

Yeah, I'm sure G-Dubs and Maliki would have felt the burn of a non-binding symbolic resolution. Who in their right mind would think Bush would change course just because the Congress expresses disagreement?

Mr. Murtha has a different idea. He would stop the surge by crudely hamstringing the ability of military commanders to deploy troops. In an interview carried Thursday by the Web site MoveCongress.org, Mr. Murtha said he would attach language to a war funding bill that would prohibit the redeployment of units that have been at home for less than a year, stop the extension of tours beyond 12 months, and prohibit units from shipping out if they do not train with all of their equipment. His aim, he made clear, is not to improve readiness but to "stop the surge."

"Crudely hamstringing", a clever variation of Der Dolchstoss: instead of putting the knife in the troops' back, the traitorous Murtha wants to use the knife to cut the troops' achilles tendon. Nice.

What would the WaPo have the Dems do? Make heartfelt speeches and conduct "oversight".

It's true that nonbinding resolutions won't stop the troop surge, which is already underway. But after years of minimal debate and oversight of the war, the House Democratic leadership was right to allow scores of representatives to speak at some length on Iraq. Some of the speeches were little more than partisan rhetoric, but there were also intelligent and heartfelt interventions, especially from veterans of Iraq and Vietnam.

My mental picture of what "oversight" means: the Dems looking over the shoulders of Bush and the GOP as they rape and brutalize our country and the Middle East. The Dems point out the atrocities "Ooh, that was bad. Ouch, they shouldn't have done that.", while not lifting a finger to stop them.

Of course, the WaPo knows that if the Dems did do something concrete to stop the surge and the war it would be political suicide.

It would be nice to believe that Mr. Murtha does not represent the mainstream of the Democratic Party or the thinking of its leadership. Yet when asked about Mr. Murtha's remarks Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered her support. Does Ms. Pelosi really believe that the debate she orchestrated this week was not "the real vote"? If the answer is yes, she is maneuvering her party in a way that can only do it harm.

Never mind that an overwhelming majority of US voters want out of Iraq as soon as possible. It's political suicide because it would upset the Beltway Ruling Class.