The Senate yesterday approved a funding measure for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. If there hadn't been the embarrassing Democratic smackdown of Obama on Gitmo, the public may not even know they were voting on it.
There were no press conferences about how much we are spending on the wars.
There were no threats to withhold funding, thus defunding troops in a war zone.
Cindy Sheehan wasn't in the senate gallery illegally unfurling a banner from the balcony.
The Senate didn't demand the Ambassador for Iraq or the Generals to appear before Congress and testify on progress.
This excerpt sums up the process quite well.
A three-day Senate debate on the bill featured little of the angst over the situation in Afghanistan that permeated debate in the House last week on companion legislation.
Obama is sending more than 20,000 additional troops there and, for the first time next year, the annual cost of the war in Afghanistan is projected to exceed the cost of fighting in Iraq.
With support forces, the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan is expected to be about 68,000 by the end of the year -- more than double the size of the U.S. force at the end of 2008.
Among the few cautionary voices was Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer.
"I want to give this administration ... the resources it needs to successfully end these wars," Boxer said. "I don't support an open-ended commitment of American troops to Afghanistan. And if we do not see measurable progress, we must reconsider our engagement and strategy there."
Debate pretty much fizzled after Democrats retreated and moved to delete from the bill money to close Guantanamo, where about 240 terrorism suspects still are held. The companion House bill had already taken that step.
The underlying war funding measure has gotten relatively little attention, even though it would boost total approved spending for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars above $900 billion.
So, what is missing from this debate? A debate. All of a sudden the Democrats aren't interested in making a fuss about bringing the troops home. They're don't appear to be interested in releasing privileged information to embarrass the President.
Something has changed since the last time they did a funding bill last summer, I just can't put my finger on it.
Maybe they don't care about the troops in harms way as much as they said?