Back in May, in a post that I think is worth quoting at length, I noted the growing list of elected Republicans growing publicly nervous about Iraq:
This trip inside the bubble has become something of a ritual pilgrimage among Republican legislators. Why is that? If the president cared about loyalty in the traditional sense they might have something to talk about, but these guys have worked with the president for long enough to know that he doesn’t work that way. Disagreement is disloyalty, you’re either with him or you’re against him, yadda yadda. These guys know they don’t have a veto-proof majority to wave around so the point of the trip has to be something other than changing the president’s mind. Talking will never change his position and these clowns lack the stones to change it by force.
To get a clue what the point might be, check out Timmeh:
NBC’s Tim Russert said it “may have been a defining pivotal moment” in the Iraq debate.
Three points! No net! Our very concerned delegation gets no compromise (the dog might not want to catch that truck) but the breathless press ought to earn these politicians some desperately-needed breathing room with their home constituencies. This whole exercise could have happened just to keep the poor schmucks who answer these Congressmen’s phones from quitting en masse.
The Dems will surprise me if they don’t once again mistake kabuki for truth and let these oh-so-concerned GOP “mavericks” take point on the issue, just like the brave three Senators who valiantly spectered on the right of habeas corpus.
The list of noisy but useless Iraq defectors now includes Sens. Domenici, Lugar, Warner and Voinovich. All of them have very deep concerns about keeping troops in Iraq, they all want to see a pullout that more or less resembles Democratic proposals but none of them will vote with the Democrats to override the president’s veto. By now any number of bloggers have picked up on the point that these gestures have no practical meaning unless they come with a willingness to effect real change.
As Atrios likes to point out politicians and pundits don’t get to choose between perfect pony plans and horrible strawman alternatives, they have the Democratic pullout proposals and the president’s war. If they won’t support existing alternatives then our Republican friends still support the president’s war just as much now as before they opened their mouths.
***
I should add that the practical uselessness of these Senators’ gestures is somewhat outweighed by some significant intangibles. Each defecting Republican, even in word only, creates more cover for additional wavering party members to jump ship. Just as importantly, for our “liberal” news media it often seems like an idea only stops being loopy-world crazy when a decent number of Republicans say it. As badly as it reflects on opinionmakers like David Broder (wouldn’t it be nice if they recognized that Iraq is an unredeemable disaster without needing permission from Republicans?), these defections will tilt news coverage away from Bush and the Kagans, further increasing the pressure on potential defectors.
In the long run the practical value of these public heterodoxies cannot be denied. But, as they say, in the long run we’re all dead. Unless Congress takes some practical steps to end the war now, Bush will run out the clock and his Democratic successor (dare to dream, Romney fans) will do the right thing with or without Republican help.