I love this Milbank article. I wish all of you could see the front page of our Putnam-loving newspaper today. Down at the very bottom right, in a very tiny box...they link to this article by Dana Milbank. They don't like their Opie Putnam picked on.
Taking the war out of the war debateRep. Adam Putnam of Florida, the man in charge of Republican strategy in this week's great debate on Iraq, was a study in nervous energy as he waited to speak on the House floor yesterday. He paced behind the back row. He cracked his neck to the left and right. He wrung his hands. He buttoned, unbuttoned and rebuttoned his suit jacket. He cracked his neck some more, checked his BlackBerry, rocked on his heels, coughed, stroked his chin, folded and unfolded his arms, coughed, scratched behind his ear, swallowed heavily, and coughed again.
...."This is a rather toothless 97 words," Putnam began in his floor speech, calling the proposal "a narrow nonbinding resolution that misses the bigger picture." Minutes later, he changed his view. "The majority would have us consider a resolution that puts us one day closer to handing militant Islamists a safe haven the size of California."
So which one is it: toothless or catastrophic?
And here's more about his war room. You really need to read the whole article.
To help Republicans with the task of conducting an Iraq debate without talking about Iraq, Putnam set up a "war room" in the Longworth office building to provide research and debate material, parliamentary experts, and a "rapid response system."
...."But Putnam, host of the war room, had only begun to fight. He called a news conference in the Capitol basement with Boehner and distributed orange juice made with fruit his family had grown in Florida. Sipping the juice, he repeated his dueling points: (a) "This is just the first step to defunding troops in harm's way," and (b) "This week's resolution is really just a stunt."
I especially loved this part at the end:
The Post's Jonathan Weisman asked for a clarification. "Is this resolution a meaningless stunt or is it very consequential?"
Boehner struggled through an answer about "two levels and two different points." Putnam frowned but said nothing.
There's not much to say when you are still standing with George Bush.