If public opinion of the way the war in Iraq is going drops much farther in the polls, I wouldn't give much for the odds of Fox News' staying on board. Case in point: at this writing Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday is 'interviewing' Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Not much new there, except that Wallace has asked a few disconcerting questions, and maybe MAYBE not just because Pelosi is a Democrat and Majority Leader.

Wallace asked for example why Pelosi thinks Congress is ranking so low in the opinion polls. When Pelosi rightly pointed out that the public hoped a Democratic-majority Congress would end the war, and is currently disappointed.

Whereupon Wallace -- of all people -- asked a few pointed questions about whether the Dems in Congress might be able to do more: you could keep bringing the war up for a vote, he pointed out; you could cancel vacations, etc; you could keep passing bills [that Bush wd have to veto].

Seems to be a point in there somewhere.

Anyone hoping for a loyal opposition to the Iraq war should cringe when Dems claim 1) that needed social services are not being provided, because of "unfunded mandates"; and 2) that they cannot end the Iraq war because of "no veto-proof majority" in the Senate.

If the needed programs are prohibited by no funding, then the Iraq war can be prohibited by no funding.

It's that simple.

John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich, and Bill Richardson have all made related points in their different ways: it is the currently Democratic U.S. House of Representatives that holds the power of the purse strings. This war will cease when the House stops funding it. Nor should any reputable news medium go along with bogus allegations that bringing the troops home somehow places them in greater jeopardy.

Keeping them in Iraq places them in jeopardy. Furthermore, there is ample funding in the pipeline already to take care of the operation of bringing them home. And if funding for withdrawal -- or redeployment -- did run out, Congress could move quickly to provide any necessary stopgap.