I must preface this post by stating that, while I still have profound differences with Senator Cantwell over her vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq and other issues of significance (and because of these issues will vote for Hong Tran in September), I do realize that the issue at hand is when and how we exit Iraq and move forward. With this in mind, I offer the following:
On Sunday, August 13th, Senator Maria Cantwell came to the Snohomish County Democrats’ picnic to kick-off her re-election campaign. She reminded us that she had also begun her 2000 campaign in her home county and saw no reason to do anything different this year. To be sure, Maria Cantwell is very popular in Snohomish County for her strong environmental positions and, more recently, her leadership in the fight to challenge Enron’s lawsuit against the Snohomish County PUD.
When Senator Cantwell got up to speak to the assembled Democrats at the picnic, she was sure to talk about both of these things. I was surprised a bit that, while she recognized Congressman Rick Larsen who was also in attendance, she did not mention the Wild Sky Wilderness bill that Larsen is pushing in the House with the strong support of both Senators Cantwell and Murray. Nevertheless, she was very good on what are considered to be her signature issues of environmental stewardship and renewable energy. To her credit (or perhaps she knew that others would bring it up) she did not say much about drilling in ANWR and kept her focus on Washington State.
She did a nice job of taking the republicans to the woodshed for their lack of oversight on just about everything from the massive budget deficit to foreign policy. It was when she got to Iraq that I saw a different Maria Cantwell from the one I saw and heard in Yakima though. She began her remarks on that subject by saying, “We can no longer stay the course in Iraq. The Democrats say it is time for us to change the course in Iraq!” She said that we need to help the Iraqis get their affairs in order by the end of this year and start bringing our troops home. I want to emphasize at this point that, at no time did she ever say “Year of Transition”. For that alone, I think it was her strongest statement on Iraq this year.
She did go on to say some more things about the need for the Democrats to reclaim the Senate and the House this year. She talked about having Democrats at the helm of the various committees and how a Democratic majority would keep the Supreme Court safe from the right wing extremists. Overall, it was a good speech to a receptive crowd. She was followed by Senator Byron Dorgan (D-North Dakota) who just happened to be in the neighborhood on a book signing tour and also happens to have some in-laws in the area. Dorgan did a good job of talking up Maria’s leadership in her fight against ANWR drilling and how she and Patty were a formidable team representing our state.
I have to say this about Cantwell’s remarks on Iraq, whether it is because she really recognizes the failures of the Bush administration or she has been listening to those in her camp who are helping her correct her own course, she seemed very comfortable (to point of passionate) about the call to “change course” and pulling the troops out of Iraq. I can’t say that I was expecting any particulars on how we “stand up the Iraqis” but that is not necessarily for her to say. What I still hope to hear at some time in the near future however is how long after the end of the year will she support keeping our troops in the middle of the Iraqi civil war that will certainly still be going on at that time. For now, I am convinced that she has backed away from the Liebermans of the party in their continuing support of “stay the course.”
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Mike's Blog Round Up
52 minutes ago
4 comments:
Chad - What is your reaction to her latest statements (http://www.kirkdorffer.com/ontheroadto2008/)?
Hi, Chad:
I know that we disagree on whether or not it was right to go into Iraq. Hopefully, we can agree to disagree, agreeably, and we need not go into those matters here.
In your post, you said:
"(Cantwell) seemed very comfortable (to point of passionate) about the call to “change course” and pulling the troops out of Iraq. I can’t say that I was expecting any particulars on how we “stand up the Iraqis” but that is not necessarily for her to say."
I think it's very important for the good Senator to specify what changing course means, aside from pulling US troops out of Iraq. She need not formulate the plan herself -- she could say she supports so-and-so's plan.
The voters should know what it is that she supports, not just that she doesn't support the President. In the current political climate, I take it for granted that a Democrat running for office doesn't support the President's policies. But just what is it she does support?
Of course, for me personally, because I believe in the party system, I will not be voting for Senator Cantwell. But if I were an independent, I'd want to know the specifics. Is she suggesting we just withdraw and let the Iraqis sort out their own problems, either immediately or on a specific future date? Or does she want to leave some kind of American presence to help stabilize Iraq until the government accomplishes certain tasks? If so, what are those tasks?
These are important questions, and just saying that you want to change course may be insufficient to win votes.
But, hey, thanks for the report on the picnic. And sorry about the Senator's failure to recognize your name -- I'd've been bummed out too.
Allen
Allen,
Actually it is good enough for her to simply say she stands with those who are holding the administration responsible for bringing forth a verifiable plan for re-deployment from Iraq. She has voted for the Levin/Reid Amendment calling for just this very thing.
Obviously I preferred the Kerry/Feingold Amendment that set a more specific time frame but either amendment beats the Lieberman approach of blind allegience to "stay the course."
Whether it be Levin/Reid or Kerry/Feingold, each amendment called for leaving an adequate presence to assist and continue training. Both also call for more emphasis on outreach to the international community. The Iraqis have had two significant elections to form their own government. They need to start standing up and supporting that government. We are only impeding that action with our contiued occupation force in that country.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
It seems like blogger David Postman is the only one who thinks Maria Cantwell might now "regret" her vote. The Left Shue, NW Progressive, and Wash-Blog picked up his comments and proceeded to spead this "news" around.
However, it seems strange that on the same day Postman put this on his blog, his employer (Seattle Times) had an article and an editorial lamenting that both Maria Cantwell and Mike McGavick continue to have the same muddled positions on Iraq.
But even if true, words are cheap especially before an election. Maria seems to have no plans to change anything and continues to wait for the Iraqis to "stand up" (if still alive).
Post a Comment