Minimum Wage Hike, Tax Cuts Measure Attached to Iraq War Bill

vetoing the timetable: is bush playing hardball, poker, or chicken? does he even know the name of the game?

let's break down the possibilities:

scenario a:
1. gwb vetoes
2. dems fear public will blame them if troops run out of funds
3. they panic and pass new bill with no withdrawal demand.

that's what bush wants.

scenario b:
1. gwb vetoes
2. dems pass another bill with same timetable
3. bush scrapes together every last bit of agriculture, education, etc, money he can lay hands on, gives it to pentagon, and vetoes again
4. dems send another bill with same timeline
5. gwb knows he'll run out of war money if he doesn't sign but still hopes public will blame dems when troops run out of funds, so he vetoes again.

that's what bush wants dems to think will happen if they hang tough.

he's got nothin', folks! it's a bluff!

funny thing 'bout this guy, tho: he may not know he's got nothin'. he may think he's holdin' all the cards. he may even think he's playin' some other game.

it's like the classic english lit question: is hamlet crazy or pretending to be? the answer: both. but not too many scholars see that. it's too subtle for them.

the answer in bush's case may be unclear too, but—either way—hang in there, dems: sooner or later he's got to sign, because if he doesn't sign the war ends even sooner.