The Guardian asked me to flesh out the below post on the supplemental for their newish site Comment is Free, so I'll link to that, because I think--having more time devote to clarity and background--I made the point more clearly.
Keep in mind that, though it's impossible to disentangle the Democratic strategy on Iraq vis a vis Iraq from their strategy on Iraq vis a vis elections in America, these people are on record. Reid and Nancy Pelosi both have stated their personal positions on the war. Positions that happen to be identical to Kucinich's. So when people criticize Democrats for thinking of their own electability when advancing their slow poking strategy, they should keep in mind three things: 1). That it's no secret who believes what about the war; 2). That because both houses are so evenly divided, building consensus is extremely important; and 3). That the strategy is itself not particularly popular.
This isn't, to me, about party solidarity. I just happen to think that the Democratic leadership is doing this because they know their options well, and they have concluded that this is the only one that might possibly work before Bush leaves office. And at the very least, nobody will be able to say they completely ignored the issue.