So What Did We Learn Last Night?

The Democrats ended their marathon Senate adventure without enough votes to allow an up-or-down vote on the Reed-Levin amendment to set a date for starting the pull-out of U.S. troops from Iraq, so the immediate goal was not achieved. In response, Majority Leader Reid pulled the defense authorization bill from Senate consideration, effectively cutting off all debate and possible votes on the issue. This avoids the possible adoption of weaker Iraq war amendments that might've given the illusion that Republicans wanted to end the war without taking any actual steps to do just that. The Repubs are angry because this takes away possible cover for them to hide behind, and anything that makes Republicans angry has to have something going for it. For a good summation of the marathon session, take a look at Bob Geiger. (And once you're over there, see what he's got to say about Reid's latest maneuver. Over at Election Central at the TPM Cafe, Spencer Ackerman provides an even-more-detailed guide to the bigger picture. In response to the question of who won this little dust up, he writes:

The GOP won -- today, at least. Sen. Mitch McConnell prevented the crucial ten Republican defections. Much of the media is portraying the Democrats as either obstructionists -- which must rankle them, since they weren't the ones filibustering the defense bill -- or as losers. And since the Dems didn't break the filibuster, that last part is true enough.

Looking beyond the day's vote, however, reveals a more complicated picture.

. . .
By raising the Iraq debate in the summer, the Democrats have created something of a public expectation that September is the beginning of the end for the war. Even Fred Barnes's summation piece for the Weekly Standard is titled "McConnell Holds The Line; At Least Until September." The benefit for the Democrats of the July push, even the unsuccessful one, has been to redefine the debate over the war.

By forcing the discussion now, Dems forced Republicans into the fall-back position of saying, "The war should begin to end not now, but in September." That means it will be tougher for Republicans to continue to back the war come September -- Petraeus report or no.

Although he's right that much of the media has painted the Democrats as obstructionist for leading the marathon session, John Aravosis found a couple of headlines that don't toe that line. The head on an AP piece was, "GOP Torpedoes Iraq Troop Pullout Plan," and Reuters was reporting, "Republicans Block Vote on Troop Pullout." Is the sand shifting?