Help me figure out the strategy (attaching restrictions to the surge funding)

[wryter2000]

It seems to me that adding restrictions to the funding for the surge is an absolute and total winner. Bush can't find the troops for his surge under Murtha's conditions. The numbers aren't there if BushCo has to treat our soldiers decently (training, equipment, and rest).

No matter how much the Republics whine in the House, it'll pass and go to the Senate. That's where things get interesting because of the possibility for a filibuster. But, if the Republics filibuster, Bush doesn't get the money.

Here's where I need help figuring this out. Obviously, what the Republics would like to do is amend the bill to delete the restrictions. Can they do that after the bill is brought to the floor? (Sorry to be so ignert :))

Assuming they can, they could potentially amend the bill if they got all the Republic votes and Lieberman, with Cheney casting the deciding vote. Plus, Johnson is still out sick. :(

However, we could filibuster the amendment. Even if we lost the Nelsons and Landrieu, we could still come up with 40.

In any case, the bill either passes with restrictions or Bush doesn't get the money. We could do the same thing every time he asks for more money for his war.

Now, then...it seems to me that only leaves two problems. 1) Signing statements, and 2) I honestly believe Bush is insane enough and cares so little about our soldiers that he'd try to continue his war without extra money. That would be an utter disaster for them, and we might be forced to vote some money to buy them food and bullets.

In any case, they get stuck with "you don't support the troops" because they voted against the money. If they try explaining their votes, they have to explain that they don't want the troops to have the proper rest, training, and equipment. Neither of them look good to the general public, imho.

What does everyone think?