Left In Lowell

This will probably be the last substantive post I have until I come back from my weekend getaway to Montreal (I’m away until Tuesday night), but reading down what I’ve written, it’s a doozie, and should take you days to get through.

I headed tonight to the Iraq/Afghanistan/foreign policy debate in Chelmsford sponsored by the The Citizens for Civic Courage, the Chelmsford DTC, GLAD, and the 3rd Middlesex Dems. It was a packed house in the police training room, with overflow and standing room only. I’m kind of gratified to see how many people appear to be interested at this race even with several months to go. I hope even more people will be jumping in to inform themselves as the race goes on.

This debate was the first in a series of issue-specific forums (the next is on health care), allowing the candidates to really dive into the discussion and prove if they’ve got what it takes. I commend the organizers and the moderators, Brian Hart and Sam Poulten, for a job well done.

For what it’s worth, I will be trying to get the video online; I’ve got the permission, and the technical volunteers, now I just need the time to work how to host a long streaming video. So when I get back from vacation, hopefully we get that squared away and you’ll be able to watch it at your convenience.

I took extensive notes so I might as well use them for something (my hand still hurts…I need a laptop! And now I have Mini Viao Envy after seeing Dick Howe’s new toy. Who by the way has posted on the forum as well.). For more…

The format: I liked the format, with a combination of pre-ordained, audience, and candidate to candidate questions. There were several rounds of the candidates asking each other, which really allows them to test their opponents’ strengths, and probe weaknesses. I will say, things are a lot more manageable now that there’s only five Dem candidates…

The candidates: Well, I got my first look at Miceli, who has not attended any event I’ve been to until tonight. I’ll be nice, and say there was not one issue on which he and I agreed, except maybe the position held by all candidates that we need to take care of our vets. More on his specific comments later on.

I maintain my previous impressions and say that I think Eldridge and Donoghue are the strongest candidates on substance and grasp of the issues. Eldridge is unafraid to take principled stances; and Donoghue was right behind him with a few of her own. For instance, she’s pretty strong in supporting getting our troops out of Iraq immediately, along with Eldridge, as mentioned in this Sun article. (Good article by the way.) They also both have that capacity to get some fire in the belly, especially with several statements by Donoghue (especially on vet issues) punctuated by an intense voice. (Miceli did beat her on loud passion, but more on that later.)

I sat with my co-blogger Mimi, and she was really disappointed in Barry Finegold’s positions on foreign policy, particularly his strong support for the Biden three-state solution proposal. I’ll let Mimi post separately on that issue; but as she has far more personal foreign experience than me, I look forward to her read on the situation.

On Tsongas, I’ve already written why I’ve been disappointed so far with her candidacy. She needs to stop talking about generalizations with which no one can disagree and take a chance and a stand on something…anything would be good. She always talk about running a grassroots campaign; but no amount of great hires from previously successful ‘roots candidates will inspire armies of people to take on the monumental task of organizing in their community for you if they don’t think you’re worth it. I like Tsongas, she’s a lovely person, but the only evidence I’ve seen is of an insider-advised, machine-endorsed, almost Tom-Reilly-like campaign in its structure (though Tsongas is far more personable than Reilly was). Come to think of it, however, at least Reilly took a few pretty chancy positions during the governor’s race.

So, for those who can’t wait for the online video, some details. (By the way, you’re a total political geek if you’ve gotten this far and are still reading. I myself am too far gone, I’m sunk, but you might want to consider getting a life before it’s too late! )

General emphasis from the five during the evening…well, Eldridge was firm on supporting the 90-day troop withdrawal proposed by Rep. Jim McGovern, Donoghue continued her emphasis on vets benefits, Finegold had his three-state solution, Tsongas…not too sure, Miceli on being pretty much anti-Democrat. (Honestly, that’s what I took from it. On several occasions he berated national and state Dems.)

Regarding the draft and the state of our strained military, none of the candidates were for the draft, but with the exception of Miceli, all were for drawing down of troops (either sooner or later) and fixing our military’s personnel problem by having fewer of them deployed. Several also mentioned how we need to increase services for vets so as to keep our professional force fit and military enrollment attractive.

The crazy thing was that Miceli seemed to indicate he favors a military solution for Iran, in passing, in answering this question (something to the effect of “Remember, Iran is in the offing”), and then later, when he basically said that if we think diplomacy will work with the threat from Iran, we should think again. I believe he mentioned it at least one more time near the end.

Some more, um, interesting (talking) points and gems from Miceli…

• On the GWOT: Notice there have been no incidents of terrorism in this country since we went over there, because we’re fighting them over there instead of over here.
• It would be “lunacy” to telegraph our withdrawal to the enemy with a timeline (then what would he suggest, we just stay there forever…? Eldridge subsequently reminded him that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism and we were lied to…and I would add, that our presence there is creating more recruits for terrorists, as well as sectarian strife). Oh, and lunacy appears to be a popular word with him, as he’s quoted using it in that Sun article. Other comments: By taking the fight over there, we’ve created a line of defense and kept them (terra-ists) from “establishing a beachhead” here - if we think this is not so, watch what happens when we withdraw. (Cuz, terra-ists can’t multitask and recruit or send goons all over. Have we forgotten Spain, London, Bali, Fort Dix??)
• Supports Don’t Ask Don’t Tell anti-gay military policy. Meehan has been working to lift that outdated and silly policy…from what I understand, many soldiers know who the gay members are in their units anyway. The rest of the candidates did come out against DADT.
• Was angered at other candidates at forum for being anti-Gitmo, said that they were just “reading the papers” and that we “don’t have the facts” …but if the facts supported the allegations, he’d be for maybe fixing it or shutting it down. (Um, it’s not enough that it violates our international treaties??)
• When asked how he would fight the GWOT, he said things seemed pretty good the way they were - except, we need better intelligence. (Yeah, a smarter president would be nice - thought I doubt that’s what he meant. It’s very Republican to scapegoat the intelligence community for Bush’s mess.)

OK, enough Miceli, I’m sure you get the idea.

There was a lot of talk of reviving and recreating a new G.I. bill to support returning vets on house mortgages, college, job training.

Generally speaking, the Sun article is right on…Donaghue and Eldridge support withdrawal from Iraq as soon as possible, Tsongas is for a longer timeline and does not support the McGovern 90-day bill, Finegold pushed his 3-state thing but wants some sort of way to hold the Iraqi government accountable (ie he’d vote against something like the new Democratic proposal which has no binding timeline or benchmarks).

Eldridge took the opportunity on several occasions regarding the vet benefits debate to mention his support for single-payer, universal health care. (So much so, that afterwards, I teased him by asking, “So, Jamie, are you for single payer health care?)

The candidates were asked about the GWOT (global war on terror) and security, and one answer that struck me as a red herring was Finegold’s comment about the Dubai ports agreement, though he got it wrong and said “Saudi Arabia” instead. Even I had taken a pretty measured response to the deal, because though good points were raised, I thought the hysteria at the time (from the right and the left) was a little overblown.

Regarding impeachment (which I still think should be on the table) most of the candidates said it would divert too much attention, even though, as Tsongas said, they “understand the impulse.” Miceli took the opportunity to berate the state Dems for passing a resolution to tell our state’s delegation to impeach G.W. Personally, I think the people are ahead of the pols on this…I remember being the Cassandra (Homer reference!) about troop withdrawal too, and look at the public on that issue now.

Eldridge held the door open for impeachment, saying that he wants investigations and hearings into the administration, and that he doesn’t understand why some think the desire by many Dems to impeach looks bad (I think he said this in reference to Miceli’s rant). But he said impeachment is serious and he wants to see what comes of the investigations first.

Besides Miceli, everyone was pretty down on Gitmo. They seemed pretty clear that the detainees should get their due human rights (Finegold, access to hearings or maybe international courts, Donoghue agreed that these people have rights under our treaties and that we should investigate allegations of torture, Eldridge used the words “close Gitmo,” as did Tsongas.)

For the rest, and there was a lot, you’ll need to wait for the video. I do believe that anyone who’s a member of their local cable access can obtain a copy from Chelmsford Telemedia and run it on your own town’s municipal channel. Also, NECN was there taping, as well.

Hope this was useful to someone…it’s 1am already.