Don't you dare undermine our troops, Mr. Boehner

Republican pols have scorned the idea of applying timetables to Iraq. They're so phony, so artificial (the timetables, that is). And anyone who does advocate timetables simply doesn't understand, as these chieftains of complex military strategy do, the human folly and consequent human waste of broadcasting to one's enemy a troop-withdrawal timeline.

True, Republican pols have always led the parade for timetables and benchmarks at home, when it came, for instance, to welfare or education policy. One must get tough with bureaucratic sloths and their unmotivated clients -- let them both know that the good people of America aren't about to sit around and wait, wait, wait for them to get their acts together.

For slothful Iraqi leaders and their armed clients, however, conservative pols have had nothing but liberal patience.

But all that is changing, for these principled folks just remembered they have another of their own timetables -- called an election -- to start worrying about. This timetable stuff was uppermost in their minds in 2002, in 2004 and again in 2006, mostly as a deadline for inducing the greatest possible level of fear throughout society. Conservative timetablers believed their social experimentation had boundless possibilities, and that their clients -- the voters -- would forever provide the necessary patience and, of course, the necessary fear.

But now they face an uneasy level of voter disgust, and likely even more in 2008. Thus they're screaming, "Get me rewrite!"; thus House Minority Leader John Boehner appeared last weekend on friendly ground, "Fox News Sunday," to float the new strategic script.

First some allegiance was due the old and most recently held territory. "We don't even have all of the 30,000 additional troops in Iraq yet," said Boehner, "so we're supporting the president. We want this plan to have a chance of succeeding."

Then came the conceptual bridge. "Over the course of the next three to four months, we'll have some idea how well the plan's working. Early signs are indicating there is clearly some success on a number of fronts."

But finally came some low-level strafing, suggesting a possible incursion into what the White House regards as inviolable territory. "By the time we get to September or October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't, what's Plan B," said Boehner on behalf of the frantic "we."

Plan B? Mr. Bush's Plan B, guys, is to hand this turkey of a war over to some poor Democratic schmuck of a president, then blame him or her for its quite avoidable loss.

You know that, Mr. Boehner, but all along you've been in Mr. Bush's Plan-A corner -- which is, simply, we don't do timetables -- and we've heard thousands of times how absolutely correct your besieged little corner is. Timetables are militarily idiotic. Timetables -- Congressionally imposed ones -- are intolerable encroachments on our commander in chief and commanders on the ground. Timetables are artificial limitations on needed but time-consuming efforts. Timetables are micromanagement. Timetables aid and abet the enemy. And most of all, timetables don't "support our troops."

Do you now, Mr. Boehner, wish to hobble our noble military? Straitjacket the Red, White and Blue? Congressionally micromanage? Aid and abet our determined enemy? In short, deprive our dedicated troops of gung-ho support?

For years you have spoken boldly of ideals that transcend mere electoral worries, Mr. Boehner. Now, more than ever, you should adhere to those ideals -- even if it means getting flushed down the electoral toilet in 2008. It's hard, I know, Mr. Boehner, but it's the right thing to do. You've said so yourself many, many times. Right?