Posted on August 24th, 2007 in Colorado Politics, General, National Politics | Written by Ben | No Comments »
Boulder liberal Rep. Mark Udall wants Colorado to choose him as our next U.S. Senator, but he is treading a fine line of confusion on the most important issue of our times. From the Aspen Times comes this gem:
Thursday, Udall’s plans were momentarily derailed when protester George Newell positioned himself behind the congressman, directly in line with cameras of local photographers. Newell carried a sign saying, “Dump Udall. He Votes For War” – a reference to Udall’s recent vote for passage of a $100 billion war bill sought by President Bush.
When one of Udall’s staff tried to get Newell to step away, the protester reacted angrily, saying, “That’s assault.”
When Udall joined in with a politely-phrased request to get out of the way, Newell responded, “That guy just tried to shove me out of the way.” Newell and Udall then exchanged words about Udall’s recent vote on the war funding bill.
“This guy just voted $100 billion for the war,” Newell said, to which Udall responded that he also had recently voted “to protect civil liberties, which I have always supported.” Udall said it was his position to “support the warriors, not the war,” and told Newell, “You and I both agree the war ought to end.”
Again asking Newell to disengage, and getting another anti-war argument in return, Udall continued, “You end the war by tying the funding to a different direction, which I have voted consistently to do.”
Ouch. It looks like walking a fine indecisive line only opens the rift in his party’s base a little more.
And as a watcher pointed out about the broader cynical political posturing of Udall and the Democrats:
All enemies of the US have learned that if the cost in American lives can be made high enough, the US will cut and run. The political goal of the enemy immediately before the election will be to make the war as bloody as possible in order to try to elect people like Udall. That’s not a criticism of Udall, but a fact of life.
If he really wants to protect soldiers, he needs to speak out against this macabre strategy.
He should say publicly and often that he doesn’t want his party to benefit from a pre-election period made more bloody by an enemy determined to impact the outcome.
Democrats have cakewalked to power when the enemy uses those tactics and encouraged them through their silence. They are willingly walking to political power on the coffins of our young men and women. It needs to stop.
It’s worth repeating because his analysis is spot on true.
Cross posted at Schaffer v Udall
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.