One of the Democratic Party's top consultants
is quoted in the Washington Post as advising Democrats to avoid taking a
strong stand against the escalation of the Iraq war.
Ms. Celinda Lake is quoted as follows: "people are not looking to their
individual members of Congress to solve the Iraq war". And: advising
Democrats to focus on domestic issues rather than opposing the
escalating war, Ms. Lake is quoted saying this is "the perfect
juxtaposition".
It is high time that Democrats across America, from the grassroots to
national leaders in Washington, begin a serious debate about
the soul of the Democratic Party on Iraq, and
the strategy to be credible on national security
and war.
First: standing ovation to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi for publicly opposing the troop surge and the
escalation of war it represents.
And: standing ovation to candidates such as Jim Webb and Joe Sestak and
the many Democrats who campaigned with honor for dramatic change in the
policy.
And: standing ovation to Jack Murtha, Joe Biden, and Jay Rockefeller who
began the
new Congress with strong statements and
political courage.
This is fact: The Democrats took their strongest position of leadership
on Iraq in 2006, and won, after they took weaker stands in 2002 and
2004, and lost.
Ms. Lake is wrong about the politics of Iraq
and this should be put into the open and
debated throughout the party.
Even worse:
If Ms. Lake believes "people are not looking to their individual members
of Congress to solve the Iraq war", which Democratic voters has she been
polling and what election returns has she been reviewing?
Lets get this in the open and have a party-wide debate about this:
When more than 3,000 of our heroic men and women have died in such a
tragically unwise war, it is unconscionable that some high income
Democratic consultants tell party leaders to let this continue for
partisan reasons.
It is the moral, patriotic and strategic duty of leaders to take
positions of sound military strategy and sound moral integrity on
matters of war and peace. It is not worth the life of one American to
treat the heroic service of our troops as a maneuver to determine what
is the most convenient political move or the most clever and shrewd
"juxtaposition".
It is disrespectful to our people and our democracy for the President to
escalate
the war, after an election where candidates
and voters called for the opposite.
It is equally disrespectful for Democratic consultants to try to
persuade Democrats to
accept an escalation with absurd falsehood
that "people are not looking to their individual members of Congress to
solve the Iraq war".
Like hell they aren't.
This is exactly the attitude that led Democrats to blow elections in
2002 and 2004 that should have been resoundingly won, by vacillation on
first principles, military strategy and moral leadership.
This is exactly the strategy that was rejected by Democrats in the
victorious election of 2006, and by Majority Leader Reid and Speaker
Pelosi to their enormous credit last week.
I would propose Democrats across the Nation do this:
First, think about suggesting when you make contributions of your hard
earned money, that this money not be an income transfer from you to high
paid consultants giving the kind of advice that Ms. Lake gives in the
Washington Post.
Second, when consultants such as Ms. Lake give this kind of advice,
their clients should be scrutinized by average Americans and asked
directly whether they are being urged to avoid taking stands of honor
and sound military policy.
Senators and Congressmen should be asked: are you paying big money for
this advice?
Do you realize this is not what your voters had in mind on election day?
Where the lives of your constituents in service are at risk, are you
voting your conscience or your consultant?
What Ms. Lake was quoted as saying in the Washington Post was repellent,
wrong, and embodies the worst threat to the future of the Democratic
Party, which is this:
There is a certain class of insider Democrats, that views war and peace
as issues to be maneuvered, exploited and positioned for political
advantage and not as matters of conscience, honor and sound military
policy.
When troops risks their lives, it is not about "juxtapositions". When
voters vote, elections have meaning..This is what Democrats believe,
what average Americans believe, what military families believe, and what
our voters believed in 2006.
Honorable men and women should make decisions on war and peace, based on
high principle and sound military doctrine. It is fine and proper to
have honorable disagreements on policy and principle. But it is dead
wrong, to treat the lives of our troops and the security of our Nation
as the petty cash of politics and
the commercialism of political consultancy.
Time to say: no more.