Cut and run

Like their pals in the House, Senate Republicans offer nothing more than "stay the course."

Mr. Levin and Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, proposed an amendment to a military-spending bill that would call for the United States to at least begin redeploying troops by year's end. The proposal was harshly criticized by by Senator John W. Warner, the Virginia Republican who is chairman of the committee, as a "timetable" meant to sound like something else.

"It sends signals," Mr. Warner said, signals that he asserted would undermine the bipartisan backing that the American forces in Iraq have so far enjoyed. Now is the time, Mr. Warner said, for Congress to give President Bush the support he needs, or risk making a "historic mistake."

Funny, I thought the "historic mistake" occurred in the Spring of 2003. The Levin Reed proposal -- as well as the Feingold Kerry timetable -- are attempts at rectifying that mistake, however tardy and feeble.

But never mind, here's that tough "maverick" with his plans for winning the war!

Mr. McCain said the Bush administration had made "serious mistakes" in Iraq, but that withdrawing prematurely would be a far more serious one. "Iraqi forces are not yet capable of securing the country," he said.

The options available to the United States are what they have always been, Mr. McCain said: "Withdraw and fail, or commit and succeed."

In other words, don't in any way demand accountability for those "serious mistakes" and most certainly don't demand that the present Bush course ("we're not leaving 'til I do") be altered in any fucking way.

There's a plan for ya. I'm sure the troops will be cheered.

But yesterday, as I was listening to the posturing and bluster of our brave Republican men and women in the House...

"This week's debate has given us all an opportunity to answer a fundamental question: Are we going to confront the threat of terrorism and defeat it, or will we relent and retreat in the hopes that it just goes away?" asked Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). "Achieving victory is our only option, for the sake of the American people and for our children and grandchildren."

...I began thinking of our long history of cutting and running.

And sure enough, the Rude Pundit takes us back to the days when Cap "the wimp" Weinberger convinced Saint Ronald of the efficacy of "cutting and running," less than a month after Reagan declared he would do no such thing.

Now, to be clear, I think both proposals are rather foolish. Democrats aren't conducting the war. Republicans are, and are still looking to continue to make political hay from it, even as the majority of Americans now look stricken when the name "Iraq" is mentioned. These debates don't add anything, they just make Democrats look impotent. The debate should be over Bush's vow that the troops aren't leaving until "we succeed," and what "success" is defined as. And put Republicans on record that they support him as he "stays the (disastrous) course."

Meanwhile, in other news of the Capitol, the GOP says "no" to raising the minimum wage (again) and to renewing the Voting Rights Act. Great times. Great times.