Life, the Framework and Everything

This morning's dawn broke (we hope) on the second consecutive Monday upon which our members didn't show up for work up on the old Hill. The difference being that, unlike last Monday, you probably had the day off today as well. Also, they have the day off today for a better reason than a football game. So, what will members be doing with their long weekend this time around?

What they are doing is trying to sort out what seems to be a roller-coaster of a time with this troop-surge/escalation/implementation/redeployment/ whatever-whoever-is-speaking-at-the-time-says it is thing. For those keeping score at home, here's the update: they still don't have the foggiest idea how its all going to shake out. And with good reason.

While last week ended looking like this thing was going to arrive DOA, the fight, as Johnny Mac says here, is far from over. For one, hard-core D Carl Levin can't seem to make up his mind on the troop surge, saying before that he may approve...with "conditions" of course (no word on what they are) while suggesting the opposite here. Perennial Presidential "hopeful" ("hopeful" meaning "no chance in hell") Joe Biden is sticking to his guns, however, and true to form, news of Johnny Mac's demise looks to be greatly exaggerated after Bush's "cement trampoline" turned out to have more bounce than first thought. Anyone see Bush acting all aloof on 60 minutes last night? Ouch.

We anticipate that this debate, which is shaping up to look pretty big-time for D's, R's and (as an afterthought), the future of American foreign policy, will continue to engender furrowed brows and disapproving clucks amongst intelligentsia and politicos alike. However, we think that today, of all days, also offers us more than an opportunity for political point-making and continued gamesmanship. Today, perhaps, we should pause, our spoon-fulls of coco-puffs poised mid-air, and consider a question: if MLK were here, what would he say about the war? Fortunately for us, this website poses this very question! Cool, right?

Yeah, it is cool, and one particularly cool point jumped out at us. It was #5: "Martin supported a timetable for withdrawing US troops" (from Vietnam). Hmmm, that's an idea: if we at least have a target, we can try to meet it. Sounds like a good argument to us, and the MLK quote that supports this logic is pretty cool too. It all seemed so, well, familiar...where did we hear that word "timetable" before. We know it was a long time ago....

Oh yeah, it was last Summer! Last Summer we heard the word "timetable" a thousand times. Just the way that MLK said it too, as in "we need to set a timetable to get out of Iraq." Welch threw down pretty hard about it on his campaign site, even telling the Times Argus he believed that "Congress must demand a plan from the President that includes a timetable with the goal of significant withdrawal in 2007." Demands, baby, yeah! Take that Bush! Welchie's girl even dropped mad knowledge on her "timetable" plan way back in 2005.

But we haven't heard a lot about timetables recently, have we? No, we haven't. In fact, if you even Google the term "timetable" in connection with any US House event/legislation/proposal more recent than November 6th, you only get references to the timetable for, wait for it, the troop surge! On Saturday Robert Gates even went so far as to put the smack-down on the whole timetable thing, even though no one asked him about it. Wow.

This is going to be tough for ole' Welchie. Why? Because as his lefty base starts to realize he didn't give two buckets of syrup about establishing a "timetable" they're gonna get pissed. Wait, they're already getting pissed. The head honchos of VT's labor unions are even having a rally in Montpelier next Saturday to get Welchie to pay attention. Here's Welchie and his homies marching in B-town's labor day parade last year... think they'll be out there next week? Sorry to ruin it for you: there isn't a Republican's chance in Woodstock. Why? We don't know, maybe he'll be eating at the Tabard Inn (WW gives their brunch 4 stars) with Leahy. Or maybe it's because he isn't running for Congress this year. Or maybe it's because he won't end funding for the war, like he said he would during those halcyon days of last Summer, on the pleasant green, when things were so simple. Who knows, there are just so many reasons!

The bottom line is that you won't be hearing jack from Welchie about timetables, or defunding, or any of that for a long time. Maybe never again. You'll hear about dinner tables before timetables. Bush has succeeded in what they call "winning the framework" on what to do with troops, which means that he controls the conversation. Welchie is following Nancy's lead on this one, (read: no pulling funds for the war. Activists, ready your bongos!) Actually, this looks to be shaping itself into a bit of a pattern. Check the link to Welchie's voting record thus far: he has voted with Nancy %100 of the time. I think we can all agree: that just ain't the old Vermont "independence" shining through now, is it?

Which brings us back to MLK, on his very own day. Understanding that King would have called for a timetable is pretty elementary. He did so regarding Vietnam ("to sustained applause," according to transcripts.) So, why the silent treatment from Welchie on this point? It's weird, isn't it, especially considering what Welchie's website says about MLK. Turns out that Welch saw King speak once, in Chicago. And what a speech it was. According to whoever wrote the website, "Dr King's political courage and resolute commitment to nonviolence have had long-lasting effects on Peter's beliefs and work."

The question we at WW have is pretty simple: how long does "long-lasting" really last? Well, it looks like we're going to find out.