1115.org

On Monday, Sen. Dick Lugar, described by one and all as a respected Republican, practically a party elder, stood up in the Senate and offered what was described as an “unusually blunt assessment” of President Bush’s Iraq policy:

In my judgment, the costs and risks of continuing down the current path outweigh the potential benefits that might be achieved…. Persisting indefinitely with the surge strategy will delay policy adjustments that have a better chance of protecting our vital interests over the long term.

Much was made of the fact that Lugar has pretty much toed the President’s line on Iraq so far, and he was choosing to speak out now, when the rest of the Republican party has entered into a tacit conspiracy to wait till September to start pronouncing judgment on the surge in particular, and Bush’s Iraq strategy in general. Lugar’s act of rebellion was also regarded as empowering others to rebel:

As the top Republican and former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Lugar’s critique could provide political cover for more Republicans wanting to challenge Bush on the war.

And, to be sure, Sen. George Voinovich stepped up to Lugar’s still-warm mike the very next day, and delivered the same message:

Republican senator George Voinovich broke with the Bush administration over Iraq on Tuesday, warning that the United States must begin planning for a “responsible military disengagement” from the 4-year-old conflict.

So Wednesday morning, the brave and fearless Sen. Lugar decided to explain to Matt Lauer that he really had no intention of actually walking the walk:

Lugar has no intention of acting on his rhetoric. Speaking this morning with NBC’s Matt Lauer, Lugar said that Congressional measures aimed at curtailing U.S. military involvement in Iraq, including “so-called timetables, benchmarks,” have “no particular legal consequence,” are “very partisan,” and “will not work.”

What exactly happened between Monday’s speech and Wednesday’s disavowal of any intention to actually vote his rhetoric? The White House reached out to Lugar, in the person of national security adviser Stephen Hadley:

Lugar, the senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, plans to meet Thursday privately with Bush’s national security adviser, Stephen Hadley. Hadley requested the meeting after Lugar delivered a lengthy floor speech contending the president’s war strategy won’t have time to work and that U.S. troops should start leaving.

The meeting had not even happened by Wedesday morning, when Lugar publicly stuck a pin in the balloon that he had so publicly inflated on Monday.

This is something Republicans are getting awfully good at: getting liberals all excited by talking the talk, and then without any sense of embarrassment, or even contradiction, blithely refusing to walk the walk.

Even as we vow never to fall for this stunt again, it’s hard not to wonder what the White House has on these people. Could every last one of them actually have let himself be photographed having sex with a minor? Or does it have to do with lewd and lascivious conduct with farm animals instead? Or maybe it’s the double whammy—underage farm animals?