John Murtha In The Spotlight

I am now watching John Murtha speak in House debate on C-SPAN.

I have a special interest because Murtha used to be my congresscritter when I lived in Western Pennsylvania. His reputation then was as a porker and a reliable foot-soldier in the Democratic Party. Not a heavyweight on much of anything. That was plenty enough to get him re-elected time and again in a safe Democrat district and to advance him through Party ranks.

I should also point out that I am a veteran and I honor Rep. Murtha's long service, both in the military and in Congress. He does not deserve some of the opprobrium being directed toward him from the right. But I also say that he has always been something of a mediocrity and does not deserve the adulation he has received from some in the press and blogosphere.

Murtha is not, as some would have it, a "truth teller." He is simply a man chosen by his party, because of his military status and his longtime criticism of the Iraq war, to advance what they see as an advantageous argument. Nor is he a man of superior intellect and integrity. He simply represents a specific set of arguments and proposals. That he may sincerely subscribe to these arguments matters not. The debate should take place without any reference to the character, the service, the sincerity, or the integrity of the person making the proposal.

But of course, that is too much to ask for these days.

Right now as he speaks Murtha is stooping to a disgusting level, reading exquisitely-crafted supportive letters purportedly written by constitutents who have lost sons in Iraq. Now Rep. Hayworth is replying in kind, reading e-mails purportedly from troops in Iraq denouncing Murtha's position. Now Murtha is talking about how much he feels for disabled troops. In the past he has rejected criticism that comes from people who have never worn the uniform. One Republican speaker earlier charged that Murtha dishonored the Marines. All of thes ploys are beneath contempt, but sadly they have become the common coin of our national dialogue.

As disgusting as it is, however, the current House debate is a marked improvement over what has gone before. It brings the Democrat agenda out into the open and makes it the point of discussion. No more of this absurd "Bush Lied, People Died" crap. Now we are debating directly the war and its conduct.

To advocate an end to the war is not a betrayal of our troops, as Republicans charge. And, I might add, neither troops in the field nor veterans have any special status in this discussion. Far too much discussion on both sides centers on the troops. I am not saying we should not consider the commitment of our men and women in uniform or ignore the terrible dangers they face. But I am saying that the wisdom of the war and its conduct are matters that must be discussed in terms of national interests, goals, mission and the like and must be the concern of all citizens whether or not they wear or have worn the uniform.

The merits of Murtha's proposal are grounds for legitimate discussion. The Congressman has advanced specific points in support of his proposal. 1) US troops are exacerbating rather than solving the problem, 2) Iraq authorities have no incentive to work effectively to achieve stability so long as the US is propping them up. 3) The administration has "no plan" for ending the conflict. 4) The cost in American gold and blood is too high. 5) The US, by deposing Saddam, has already done all that it can reasonably be expected to do. Each of these can be debated rationally and seriously.

DAMN!

Now the floor debate is over and voting is taking place. The Democrats have ducked the issue. They are voting overwhelmingly not to demand immediate withdrawal. Smart, I don't think they can win that argument right now. But, I also don't think they can put the toothpaste back into the tube.

The proposal has been made -- bring the troops home. The Moonbat base of the Democrat Party is energized and is not going to shut up. The administration is beginning to strike back at its critics. Both sides are invoking memories of Vietnam. I don't think that we can go back now to the comfortable argument over "what did Scooter know and when did Woodward know it?" From this point on "Bring the Boys [and Girls] Home" and "Stay the Course" will dominate the national discussion.

I think the Democrats made a tactical mistake here. The debate will now focus attention again on Iraq and the entire Middle East and that, for the administration, is an eminently winnable argument.

Let the serious debate begin -- please!