Back at the computer after a refreshing three hours of sleep, I find myself reading articles like this one about the "status of forces" negotiations between the U.S. and Iraq. Looks like Bush supporters are going to have to start arguing that setting up a "time horizon for troop withdrawal" (which is wanted) is not the same thing as setting timetables to bring U.S. forces home (which Bush and McCain have always equated with craven surrender). Hey, whatever gets us outta there is fine with me.
Another stumbing block seems to be — and I quote from the above-linked article — "the legal immunity of U.S. troops and Defense Department personnel from Iraqi prosecution for any alleged crime." Isn't this how the FISA law was handled? You do what you want and then you ram through retroactive immunity? After they leave office, Bush and Cheney are planning to begin robbing liquor stores and then having that made legal.
Remember the good ol' days when our government was either so virtuous or so competent at not getting caught that it didn't need retroactive immunity for anything it had done?