At 12:50pm yesterday afternoon, Dan Froomkin summarized nicely much of what I wrote about earlier that morning.

Faced with a bipartisan rebellion against the decision to put more troops in harm's way, White House political aides are concentrating less on winning support for the president's policies -- and more on trying to maneuver the Democrats into taking action they can depict as cutting off funds to the troops....With "support the president" now a losing proposition, the White House is turning to "support the troops" as their political failsafe.

In addition to playing politics with the "surge" plan, this administration will use the threat of Iran in the region to further blackmail the Dems. It's what they do.

Regarding Iran, in USA Today:

U.S. officials from commanders in Iraq to President Bush have stepped up claims that Iran has been supplying Iraqi insurgents with weapons and training to kill U.S. troops....Such claims, however, are being met with denials from Iran and skepticism at home. Faulty U.S. intelligence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, which Bush used to justify in part the 2003 invasion of Iraq, has eroded much of the administration's credibility, military expert Anthony Cordesman said.

Suppose this time the intel is true, that Iran is indeed supplying the insurgency in Iraq. Then due to the lack of credibility resulting from this administration's lies and deception with the lead up to the Iraq war, our troops are currently exposed to Iran-backed danger. Because we can no longer trust the word of Bush et al, U.S. soldiers pay the price and they are potentially the sacrificial lambs.

And somehow the Dems will be framed as not supporting the troops?? Hopefully the public and MSM will see through this utter nonsense.