Must be the "reprehensible and irresponsible" world tour

And John Murtha is having none of it.

"It is time for a change in direction," said Rep. John Murtha (news, bio, voting record), D-Pa., one of Congress' most hawkish Democrats. "Our military is suffering, the future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf region."

[...]

Vice President Dick Cheney jumped into the fray Wednesday by assailing Democrats who contend the Bush administration manipulated intelligence on Iraq, calling their criticism "one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city."

Murtha, a Marine intelligence officer in Vietnam, angrily shot back at Cheney: "I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done."

But whose counting?

The top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, Murtha has earned bipartisan respect for his grasp of military issues over three decades in Congress. He planned to introduce a resolution Thursday that, if passed by both the House and the Senate, would force the president to withdraw U.S. troops.

Surely, supporters of the war will respond with a reasoned debate on the merits of keeping our troops strength at current levels, and not resort to RNC talking points. Right?

Rep. Kay Granger (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, said Murtha's call for withdrawal was "reprehensible and irresponsible."

That's what I keep hearing. But no, Kay, entering into a war based on manipulated intelligence is reprehensible. Entering into a war with no plan for how to subdue the conquered or maintain the peace is irresponsible.