"Veto" Is a Four-Letter Word to House Democrats

Actually it's a four-letter word to all of us, but it's become a profanity for House Dems:

The moment has been long in coming, but it may finally have arrived.

For the last year and a half, on issues including healthcare, financial regulation and climate change, Democrats in Congress have bent for President Obama. Liberals swallowed hard to accept compromises that fell short of their long-sought goals, and moderates cast tough votes that now threaten their reelection prospects as voters revolt against government overreach.

Then, last week, the president asked them to bend yet again — this time to approve more money for his troop buildup in an Afghanistan war that many Democrats oppose.

And once again, lawmakers went to work. On the eve of the vote last week, Democratic leaders compiled a complicated $82-billion package of war funding, disaster aid and domestic spending that achieved the seemingly impossible — meeting the president's request while accommodating the needs of its politically diverse members.

Obama responded with a one-word message that sent shudders through his party on the Hill: veto.

In that exchange, the tension between the White House and the president's Democratic allies spilled over.

Obama has led what historians have called the most productive Congress since President Lyndon Johnson, but he may have a much harder time extracting difficult compromises in the future.

"You've got a lot of people doing a lot of heavy lifting here," said freshman Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.). "I don't know that we expected flowers and chocolates," he said. But the president's response "was an unwelcome message."

It's not flowers and chocolate, Congressman, it was rainbows and unicorns.

As usual Democrats looked at the war funding bill as a Christmas tree upon which they could hang lots of shiny ornaments for their constituents back home, and in so doing, blew up the cost.  A presidential veto would serve them right.