Celinda Lake Thinks Voters Didn't Elect Democrats To Halt Iraq Escalation: Time For Debate About Consultants and War

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.