Mitch McConnell is allowing the Senate to debate the Democrats exist timetable. He says that he welcomes debate. I bet he does, I bet he can’t wait for the Democrats to make all kinds of defeatist statements while the troop surge is just beginning to work. And for the Democrats to reverse themselves:

“Republicans are eager to engage in this debate … because it’s different in kind from any previous Democratic proposal,” McConnell said in a speech on the Senate floor.
“It is unprecedented in the powers it would arrogate to the Congress in a time of war; it is a clear statement of retreat from the support that the Senate only recently gave to [head of the multinational force in Iraq] General David Petraeus; and its passage would be absolutely fatal to our mission in Iraq,” he added.
McConnell said Reid’s plan was “the memo our enemies have been waiting for. Osama Bin Laden and his followers have repeatedly said that the U.S. does not have the stomach for a long fight with the terrorists. Passage of the Reid Joint Resolution will be the first concrete sign since Sept. 11, 2001, that he was right on target.”
McConnell argued that setting timetables was a bad idea. He cited Reid as well as Democratic Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Joe Biden of Delaware — chairman of the foreign relations committee and co-author of the bill with Reid and Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) — as having spoken out against setting timetables.

And here are their previous statements:

Sen. Reid said in January 2005: “As for setting a timeline, as we learned in the Balkans, that’s not a wise decision, because it only empowers those who don’t want us there, and it doesn’t work well to do that.”
Clinton said in September 2005: “I don’t believe it’s smart to set a date for withdrawal. I don’t think you should ever telegraph your intentions to the enemy so they can await you.”
Biden said in March 2005: “If we’re really going to stay, I mean, the idea of setting a timetable to leave generally means that you have to set and train the process of leaving. It is not an easy process. And I think once that is smelled as the option, then I think you’ll find it will degenerate quickly in the sectarian violence, every man for himself, and the conclusion that will be achieved will be, I think, a Lebanon in 1985. And God knows where it goes from there.”

Flip-flop much?