Matt has great analysis below of Matt Zemek's op-ed in today's Seattle Times and on recent developments on the Iraq issue in the McGavick-Cantwell race. A couple additional points worth noting:
One, McGavick had the stones to disagree directly with Majority Leader Bill Frist on a couple key points of the Iraq debate. I happen to disagree with McGavick on the particulars of those issues, but am impressed with the fact he's not going to be shy about standing up for what he believes to be right. Having worked in the Senate, I can attest that's the kind of person you need to represent your state rather than just always toe the party line.
Two, on top of Matt's analysis of the Zemek op-ed, another slice of the column jumped out at me:
Politics -- at its best -- is not about winning; it's about winning with honor and authenticity; after all, the only way politics truly improves people's lives is if the electorate embraces your ideas.
The irony in that statement is thick given that the subject of his column is Cantwell's struggling bid for re-election. And particularly since the only way incumbents stuck under 50% in the polls (even before 3rd party candidates are included) can win is to win ugly, beating the tar out of their opponent along the way in what amounts to a political street brawl. [For most recent polls see: Rasmussen Reports, Strategic Vision, and Zogby]. That's not exactly a strategy for "winning with honor and authenticity."
The very fact that self-described Bush loathers like Zemek are having second thoughts about Cantwell, and willing to seriously consider McGavick, is bad news for Maria Cantwell, but great news for the TV stations who are going to sell her and various arms of the Democratic party the TV ads they'll use to start hitting McGavick below the belt.
UPDATE: Typo fixed.
Posted by Eric Earling at August 18, 2006 09:02 PM | Email ThisThat's toe the party line, not "tow" the party line. I don't know why people get that one wrong so often.
Considering what a drag that vote you mention may be on Cantwell's campaign, though, maybe she is towing it, as well as toeing it.
Posted by: stu on August 18, 2006 10:54 PMDoomsday Pending? or Doomsday Thwarted?
In the year 1905, Nobel physicist, Albert Einstein, discovered the Proton Genie, and gave the World his paradigm E=mc? equation.
Einstein proved that extracting and fusing PROTONS from ordinary pure water can make everybody on Earth so idly rich and content from the benefits of this clean, virtually-free and inexhaustible energy supply that nobody should ever again have to contend with pollution, war or poverty, and Mother Nature can once again reign as The Supreme Mistress of any and all Climate Change.
The Earth Clock reads: One Minute Until Doomsday!
Is it too late? Or, will some ordinary, individual tinkerer (maybe even a high school student) rise to the occasion and demonstrate the physical expression of Einstein's equation so that the entire World can prosper in peace and happiness, far into the distant future?
web site:
http://howtosavecivilization.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-to-save-civilization.html
Mike! may be pro-choice but he won't be an idealogue who withholds his support for an extremely qualified justice.
We know that Cantwell is such a Senator.
Deep, deep down Cantwell is a very shallow person.
Posted by: Brent in Ferndale on August 19, 2006 09:38 AMExactly where is McGavick on this Iraq war? What's his plan to end the misery of all involved and the $8 billion per month drain on the treasury.
McGavick does not appear to be a maverick - just another guy trying to figure out what he needs to say to get elected.
Posted by: thor on August 19, 2006 09:54 PMTry reading and comprehending. It's very intellectually stimulating.
I wrote, "Mike! may be pro-choice but he won't be an idealogue who withholds his support for an extremely qualified justice."
You replied, "Mike! is an ideologue when it comes to the pro-choice position."
You wrote, "He's also an ideologue in favor of giving "benefits" to gays and lesbians including social security (?)..."
And your source for this is???
"...and mandating health care insurance (for all businesses?)..."
And your source for this is???
"...Don't tell us that he will ignore issues when he considers a judicial nomination."
I didn't. What I wrote is that Mike! won't vote against an extremely well qualified jurist because of disagreement on one issue.
Cantwell has already proved that she will.
And re: benefits to gays and lesbians he states:
I support the traditional institution of marriage. At the same time, I oppose economic discrimination and believe that particular attention should be paid to the laws affecting nontraditional couples who have children. Changes must be made in the benefits laws of our state and nation to make sure that our laws recognize these children. As CEO, I supported such benefit policies at Safeco.
Maybe you want to parse this last statement but to me it says the Federal and state governments should change laws to to accomodate these "families." That translates to social security benefits and Medicare at the federal government would it not? If not, what do you think it means?
Posted by: unlisted on August 20, 2006 01:13 PMThe central front????
It is the only front!!
Imagine that in World War Two, we land the Tiger and Torch convoys in Africa, push Rommel back across the Med, then land in Italy and that's it. Four years later in 1946 we still are bogged down in Italy, giving Germany plenty of time to get its Norwegian heavy water up and running and drop a nuke on London.
In World War Two (leaving aside the Pacific front - which had several fronts at once) let's look at how many fronts we had just in Europe. There was the submariner realm of the Atlantic against the Wolf Packs (That's One), The Invasion of Italy (That's Two), The invasion of France at Normandy( three), the invasion near Marseilles (four), the lend-lease program to Russia and the clearing of the Barents and Murmansk Seas of Wolf Packs (five), the hunting down and destroying of German surface raiders in the Atlantic (six), the spy front including the thwarting of German efforts in Ireland (seven), the offensive partisans efforts in France and the Low Countries (that's eight), the invasion of Norway (nine), the invasion of the Eastern Med Nazi strongholds (Crete, Greece, etc.) (We are up to ten now), the support of partisan activity in Yugoslavia (eleven), the bombing of the German homeland (twelve). Nearly all of these front were hot at the same time.
Meanwhile we worked the diplomatic front to keep Fascist Spain out of the War and we brought Fascist leaning Argentina into the War against its German patron. And we supported logistically and otherwise British and Russian efforts in Iraq and Iran to stop the budding Nazi regimes there (recall that the Baathist regime sprang from these World War Two Iraqi Nazis and that Iran drew its name during this era from the German term Aryan reflecting Persian desire, even during the 1940's, to atone for its 'sin' of freeing the Jews under the rule Artexerxes and Cyrus and to overcome Persian shame for suffering defeat during what was meant to be a 'holocaust' but because of the faith and courage of Ester turned into the Jewish victory of Purim.)
All this while pushing back the Japanese and running the Manhattan project.
Today, nearly half of America does not really consider the nation to be at war. This is a failure of leadership.
Iraq is our only offesive front, which allows our enemy to concentrate on winning there and to launch offensive operations out of Gaza, in Somalia (which fell to this enemy earlier this summer), - that would be the equivalent of somewhat sympathetically fascist Sweden falling completely to the Nazis during 1943. Other Muslim offensive operations are being launched from Southern Lebanon, in Spain, Indonesia, Britain, and a host of other places. And who knows what on August 22nd - some say Jerusalem (see the latest from Debka.com). When the enemy feels no heat they have plenty of time to act. Again this is a failure of leadership.
Both Cantwell and McGavick are more of the same. George Bush light. And not the September 12th George Bush, but the summmer of 2006 George Bush.
We will lose this War if we do not choose to win it.
God have mercy on our nation.
Posted by: Jericho on August 20, 2006 01:47 PMYour monicur when contrasted with your thoughts (emotions?) insults the Norse.
Are there nukes in Iraq? If so, why haven't we found any yet. We've occupied the country for a few years now. Along the way we've put our nation in a far worse position to defend against hostile places like Iran and North Korea - which both appear to be close to developing nukes.
And the $8 billion monthy drain on the federal treasury this ghastly war in Iraq is costing us is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of cost - our nation has lost a good deal of our moral purpose in the eyes of many more parts of the world because of this enormous mistake, how many yound Americans have been killed or maimed in this war, and what about the mounting death toll this war has inflcited on everyday Iraqis.
And what are Bush and Cheney asking the rest of us to do - next to nothing - but keep paying for $70 a barrell for oil while countries that hate us arm themselves with the profits, There is a very real war against America - but we're not winning it in Iraq, we're inflaming it.
Real leadership would take real leadership measure get all of us off the addiction to foriegn oil (i would happily delay any purchase for this purpose), would have led our troops into battle in Iraq with adequate troop strength and would have been honest with us, among other things.
Posted by: thor on August 20, 2006 05:39 PMYours is the best post I've read on Sound Politics. Accurate, fact based, and sound reasoning -- thank you.
Posted by: John McDonald on August 20, 2006 10:16 PMYou brought up another Good Point. How come the Republicans keep reminding us we are in a "War" and have a "War Time President"? LOL, it's probably because more people are being shot in Washington DC and NYC then in the War on "People who kill innocent civilians".
Posted by: John McDonald on August 20, 2006 10:23 PMIn Iraq we seem to have boxed ourselves into a no-win situation. We can't leave because it would create a horrible outcome for our national interests and for most Iraquis. But by staying there we are not making the situation better. The situation may deteriorate to a point where our limited presence in Iraq is superflous. In that case our sacrifice will have been for nothing.
So, how do we avoid this outcome? How do we get to a stable Iraq that won't harbor terrorists or be in the palm of Iran? I'm not impressed by Mr. McGavick's statement about what he would have done in the past. And his argument that we shouldn't qestion the course of the war now seems far too convienient.
Posted by: Sdstar on August 21, 2006 10:43 AMNRSC JULY 2006 FEC FILING
Total Raised in July: $3.3 million
Total Raised Cycle: $65.9 million
Cash on Hand: $20.6 million
Before this Iran thing plays out, we are going to be thanking our personal gods we had forces in strength in Iraq.
Funny how all the liberals and RINO's are suddenly quiet about Reagan's Star Wars initiatives now that Mr. Rodgers in Iran and Kim in NK have ballistic missiles.
As it stands today, Cantwell didn't do any damage to Washington State, and she's mostly kept her mouth shut. That she may be dating the NJ crook Toricelli is harmless from that perspective.
You compare Cantwell and McGavick on the one issue that matters - this war - and at least Cantwell has the guts to vote for the war.
McGavick should take up golf. This is the one RINO who's running like a RINO, which is stupid. RINO's run like conservatives and then rule like liberals.
I predict he loses fairly soundly - 5%. Cantwell is less conservative than McGavick is liberal. Pro-choice, pro-gay, pro-surrender? Sorry, no thank you.
Posted by: RinaseaofD's on August 21, 2006 01:21 PMLet's get back to how the MSM is just giving us a bad rap in the sandbox and things are really going quite well. Let's hear more about those 7 million Iraqis who are truly greatful for the right to vote; you know, liberty and democracy and all that crap!!!
Go George, you're the best thing that has happened to the left since Richard Nixon.
Posted by: Unkl Witz on August 21, 2006 09:37 PMThe toilet backed up and look what oozed over the rim...uncle witless! Are they letting you out on overnight passes now?
Posted by: alphabet soup on August 21, 2006 09:43 PM