Good question.  It's pretty simple.  

In August, Brown became the first U.S. Senate candidate to call on President Bush to set a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq.  Brown wants the withdrawal to start after the December 15th Iraq national elections, with all of American troops home by the end of 2006.  More than 7,000 Rhode Islanders have supported Brown's petition calling on President Bush to set a timetable to bring our troops home.

Whitehouse has been all over the place regarding the war in Iraq.  Just last week, Whitehouse flipped his position position after polling Rhode Island voters.  What do I mean flipped?

For months, Whitehouse has opposed setting a timetable to withdraw American troops from Iraq.   In October Whitehouse said, "[b]y disclosing an exit strategy...U.S. leaders would be compromising troops' safety." [Brown Daily Herald]  

And in an article in the Providence Journal only a couple days ago, Whitehouse explained, "it would also be wrong for U.S. forces to leave too rapidly or on a fixed schedule."

Yet, the same day he released an internal poll, Whitehouse flipped his position, saying there should be a timetable to bring the troops home by the end of 2006.

Whitehouse has repeatedly refused to join Brown's challenge that they debate the war in Iraq and bringing the troops home.  Exactly why, we're not sure.  He has avoided many of the press calls regarding it or said that the issue could wait until an election year (as if the war in Iraq was simply a campaign issue without larger meaning.)

Is that clear enough?  I'd love to hear the blogging community's thoughts on why Whitehouse won't meet us for a debate.

What do you think about the idea to debate the war in Iraq?