Republican Erik Paulsen, who is facing our Brave Captain (Ashwin Madia) in the MN-03 race, appeared after Ashwin on WCCO Sunday morning show. After lying about his willingness to seek bipartisan solutions (he was one of the most partisan law-makers in the State House) Esme Murphy asked him about Iraq. Watch him here.

He has three distinct positions that taken together make no sense. I'll try and summarize his incoherence:

He wants a phase-down of troops, but only if the generals say so, but timelines are pure folly unless the Iraqis want it and timelines are the reason we're in the mess that we are in.

Does that make any sense whatsoever?

Okay ... okay ... lemme try again:

If the Iraqis want timelines that's okay, but we can't establish any which is why we are in the mess we are in but the phase-down is great because we listened to the generals.

Hmmm .... better? Not so much.

Let's take a closer look at what he actually said:

Claim #1: Phase-down continues

“it is absolutely critical that the phase-down we’ve seen in troop levels continues," he asserts. "As we transfer ah ah the security level uh the security forces to complete control of the Iraqi forces. It's going in the right direction. I think its also important to note that we've seen the success we've had right now because we've literally been listening to the military advisors on the ground."

The troops that have come home had their tours end and there are no more troops to replace them. That's not a phase-down, it is a simple case of running out of fresh soldiers. Last time I checked we were still not down to pre-surge levels. The Generals, like Petraeus, can only offer opinions that jibe with the White House talking points or they will be relieved of their duties.

Claim #2: Timelines got us into this mess

“It’s really pure folly for any congressional candidate or anyone to say that they know best or what the timeline should be," Paulsen asserted. That’s kind of how we got into this mess in the first place.” First of all he's challenging Ashwin's assessment that we could withdraw in 18-24 months as pure folly. However he equates wanting to establish timelines with all the problems we are currently in.

This is an amazingly ignorant statement. We are in the mess we are currently in because Republicans lied us into an invasion and occupation of a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. They promised we'd find WMDs and none have been found. The Bush Administration (remember, Paulsen's a Republican even though he won't say it) bungled the occupation. Too few troops to deal with an insurgency and a civil war at the same time. Incompetent administrators. Corrupt and incompetent contractors spending money on no-bid contracts. Torture. They've almost reduced Iraq to the Stone Age and all for the oil supplies underneath the sand.

Claim #3: The Iraqi Time Horizon

If the Iraqi government moves forward with their timeline, I think that that time horizon makes sense," Paulsen answered Murphy's question about if he supports a timeline.

It is important to note that the latest Orwellian abuse of the English language that the Republicans are using is "time horizon." No matter how fast you walk, run, drive or fly you will never reach the horizon. Furthermore, the Iraqis are still incapable of governing or protecting themselves. As long as we are there, they never will. This combination means the most likely Paulsen opposes any timelines, but is too chicken-**** to say so.

Of course, it goes without saying that we have to read the tea leave (so to speak) to determine his Iraq stance, because his campaign website still has nada on Iraq. Here's a screen capture from tonight: