I realize that I'm beginning to sound like I have a crush, but again this morning I think Arianna Huffington nails it in her piece about the disconnect between the coverage of Murtha's plan and the substance of it.

The first time I heard about Murtha's proposal to restrict deployment of untrained, ill-equipped troops to Iraq (and to limit tours of duty to one year) it was pronounced DOA, but I'm not really sure why. Maybe I'm being naive, but it seems to make a lot of sense. Everyone knows that the troops in Iraq are being pressed into much longer tours than they were promised and that they suffer from a lack of the proper equipment -- most notably body and humvee armor. Rather than cutting the funding (the double dog dare every Republican seems to be offering these days) and then getting blamed for shortages that already exist, why not put the ball back in the GOP court? If they support our troops so much, shouldn't they be required to provide a raincoat before sending them into a shitstorm?

And as Arianna points out, polls are suggesting that Americans agree. So how about it, Dems? Murtha was right on the war before a lot of us, so why not give him some consideration on this?

Analogcabin @ 8:30 AM
Permalink |