Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/leftinlowell/leftinlowell.com/wp-includes/functions.php on line 330

Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class WP_Dependencies in /home/leftinlowell/leftinlowell.com/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-support/wordpress-support.php(10) : runtime-created function(1) : eval()'d code(1) : eval()'d code on line 1
Left In Lowell » Blog Archive » There Are Snowballs In Hell Today

Left In Lowell

Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs

2013 Candidate Questionnaire Responses!

October 10, 2007

There Are Snowballs In Hell Today

by at 11:33 am.

Flabbergasted. I can’t even think of words to say. The Lowell Sun has endorsed a Democrat in the MA-05 general election! Niki Tsongas gets the nod from the editorial staff.

From the endorsement: “We were pleased to see Tsongas didn’t hesitate to state her position on President Bush’s recent veto of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program expansion bill…Ogonowski said he supports SCHIP, but has repeatedly refused to say whether he would support the veto or vote to override…We find his lack of candor on this issue troubling.”

SCHIP is such an important issue, even the Lowell Sun can’t tolerate Ogonowski’s total reluctance to admit what his vote on the override would be. BMG has more commentary.

I’m still just totally stunned. And, this is a huge blow to Ogonowski’s credibility, if he can’t get the generally conservative Lowell Sun’s endorsement.

51 Responses to “There Are Snowballs In Hell Today”

  1. MikeC01824 Says:

    I think the Sun’s endorsement has less to do with SCHIP being an important issue to them, and more to do with their desire for a candidate that is non-partisan and candid.

    Ogonowski, in a really strange twist, is neither. Maybe if he hadn’t taken on so much coaching from the GOP.

  2. Lynne Says:

    I agree with David, the “lack of candor on this issue troubling” part is strong language from a newspaper endorsement. Generally, endorsements are upbeat positives on why the candidate they endorsed is the right one - without too much mention on the other guy. That was significant, and I think meaningful. That may well have turned the tide.

    Also, the sort of campaign Ogo’s running is, as you mention, totally partisan, despite his early efforts to portray himself as above all that and independent. I’m certain that didn’t help at all.

  3. waittilnextyr Says:

    I think Mike is right, Ogonowski appears like a decent guy who has been molded into a candidate that robotically spouts right-wing rhetoric when asked a question.

    And as for the Sun endorsement, he shouldn’t have stonewalled Matt Murphy last night, as he (Murphy) appears to be the future of the Sun (and beyond) reporting.

  4. Lynne Says:

    I hope Matt Murphy sticks around a long time…he’s done such a great, and fair, job covering this race. Give that boy (er, man) a raise!

  5. joe Says:

    Why would the Lowell Sun endorse a traitor? You know, one of those people calling for us to get out of Iraq.

    Does that make the editors of the Sun traitors by extension? They’re offering aid and comfort to someone offering aid and comfort to the enemy.

    I think we should ask them. After all, they are the experts on all things treasonous and unpatriotic - think of how many times the Lowell Sun has been kind enough to point out that someone is a traitor in league with the enemy, when it never would have occured to you, over the past five years.

    Bitter, me? Oh, heavens no!

  6. Robby Says:

    Lowell Sun’s Endorsement = Kiss of Death

  7. Robby Says:

    Lowell Sun’s Endorsement = Kiss of Death

  8. Lynne Says:

    Agreed, joe…in terms of the editorials often seen in the Sun, they are often rabid, and this is a strange reverse from them. However, many of the reporters at the Sun are really doing their jobs well, and I want to make sure we don’t tar them with the same brush.

    Frankly, I don’t think the Sun would have much sway if they had gone with an Ogo endorsement. It would have been par for the course. However, to the typical conservative who often nods in agreement with the Sun, this has to give them a stunning reason to pause and think. One would hope.

  9. Always Right in Lowell Says:

    I am the typical conservative voter and am not shocked at the Sun bowing to the Meehan camp…yes, the Meehan camp. Tsongas is and will be nothing but a Meehan puppet who spouts all his smug ultra liberal nonsense. The 5th doesn’t need another typical tax and spend dem.
    Although disappointed in the Ogonowski team, I still think he’s the best candidate and will show his stuff when he gets to Washington. “Niki can hit the ground running”. What a joke. She was totally disinterested when her husband was in Washington and now she wants the power and miraculously develops a great love for the area she doesn’t even plan to live in.

  10. Ogo Backer Says:

    Always right,

    No no!!! According to Lynne, “she has lots of roots in the area and only moved away to Cambridge to be closer to her kids.”

    Ever hear of a phone, or email? Right because 35 miles is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO far away from your kids. Give me a friggin’ break. It’s not like her kids are in Tunisia. That’s a specious argument at best.
    Moreover if she was in this for the long haul why not BUY a place in the district? She wouldn’t be here unless Meehan’s seat was available. Let’s not kid ourselves.

    Bottom line: the endorsements, the ads, the debates, none of it really matters. What really matters is which candidate has convinced the voters to get to the polls on Tuesday.

  11. Robby Says:

    The Lowell Sun’s endorsement of Kerry Healey last year helped her big time…

  12. Lynne Says:


    Again RiL you belie your ability to make a coherent argument (which I know you can) by attacking people personally. Things like “smug liberal nonsense” are not helping you make any sort of point that’s going to be listened to.

    Meehan is and was a good Democrat and Congressperson, whom I very occasionally disagreed with, but who really did make a difference when he was in Congress. Sure, I’m a little disappointed in his somewhat naked ambition (but then, who in this state isn’t ready to jump into the next open Senate seat?) but I always found him to be thoroughly intelligent and articulate. You’re insulting your own intelligence by getting personal.

    We will have to judge Niki when she gets to Congress, and sure, if she’s not up to the task, I will point that out then. But I have seen no evidence that she doesn’t want to do something once she gets to Washington.

    Ogo backer: Then I think you’ll be disappointed severely. Tsgonas’ campaign, whatever you think of it, has a HUGE traditional grassroots effort. One that frankly, during the primary, surprised the hell out of me. I thought she talked a good game RE grassroots and hired all the best people (people from the Patrick campaign even) but I didn’t think she could convince people to work with her.

    Well, was I ever wrong. She won the primary with people power, largely, even though her name recognition was a superb advantage, and I really respect that she DIDn’t rely only on her name and the institutional help she got, but instead also implemented a great campaign to boot. She beat us pretty fair and square in the end.

    And if she said she wanted to move to Cambridge for family reasons, why isn’t that believable? Unless you have some sort of, I dunno, evidence or logic to contribute, then you will sound like a shill. Maybe Niki thought she was done living in Lowell. I don’t know. But I could CARE LESS. Why? Because she does know the 5th district well from her years here…she is not a carpet bagger by any stretch of the imagination. BECAUSE LOWELL IS NOT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE people. Yeah, it’s a great place, and I settled here because of a lot of its attributes. But for heaven’s sake, you do NOT have to be born and then die here to have some credibility in wanting to keep the place from falling apart.

    I am so sick of Lowellcentrism I could puke. And I love Lowell, or I wouldn’t be blogging about it. I spend 98% of my time literally physically in the city, living and working. I eat at local restaurants probably 80%+ of the time (ok, sometimes it’s Chelmsford because they have sushi). So that ought to tell you something, if I’m sick of Lowell Geographical Purity Police.

  13. Mimi Says:

    “Lowell Geographical Purity Police” — I love that line. I am going to start using it when appropriate (i.e. municipal election politics) ;-P

  14. Right in Lowell Says:

    BTW, Always Right in Lowell is a different person.

    Am I the only one who finds it amusing that all these Niki bashers who supported Donahue or another candidate now think she’s the cure-all for the 5th district? It’s amazing how qualified and experienced she became after that primary victory. For giggles people, go back and read some of the things they used to say about her during the primary race. That’ll give you an idea how legitimate their current praise of her is.

  15. Lynne Says:

    I don’t think she’s the cureall. I never said that. But I think she’s the one who’s got the best chance of getting something done, in the direction I want things to go, and who’s not equivocating on her positions of the two major candidates.

    BTW, sorry for confusing the two of you (I was wondering if you were different people or not!).

    And I mean it when I say I was surprised in the end by the strength of her grassroots. I was expecting her to rely on the establishment and her name. I criticized her for that, even. But I admit I was wrong, she has a large volunteer corps that has nothing to do with the fact that Meehan’s wife is a co-campaign-chair or that Barney Frank endorsed her.

    After all, I do have a right to change my mind. And if she can get that many people to believe in her, and she did the right thing (go with grassroots beyond the establishment) that means she was elected by more than the establishment, and that I can wholeheartedly support her.

  16. Ogo Backer Says:


    First off if you like sushi like I do try Takumi in Nashua, or Yuyu’s also in Nashua.

    Secondly, I don’t expect Ogo wins. I hope Ogo wins, and I won’t be shocked if he loses. But as I have said in other posts please explain to me why Niki the Washington insider isn’t crushing “Nice Guy Jim” by 30 points by now? Explain to me why I see so many Ogonowski signs every where? Answer is simple and it may be a little tough for you to wrap your mind around but here goes- not everyone subscribes to the left wing ideology. So don’t be surprised if it’s you who is “disappointed severely” on Tuesday. I’ve spoken with alot of people who view Niki as “business as usual” and are sick of it.

    One last thing:

    “Again RiL you belie your ability to make a coherent argument (which I know you can) by attacking people personally.”

    Posted on this website 10/5/07 “UPDATE: David confirmed it was Ogo who evicted the two biggest local bloggers in MA. What a tool.”

    Hi pot my name is kettle errrrr Lynne. Real mature.

  17. Fran McDougall Says:

    Charlestown is not Cambridge and anyone who lives in either place will tell you that. I know that this is an irrelevant fact but really we can be terribly parochial at times. There are other places to live outside of Lowell! Now, concerning the Sun’s endorsement of Niki, I think they really were hoping to be able to back Mr. Ogonowski but he has shown himself to be a dismal candidate. As I recall, the Sun’s early on endorsement of George Bush was on the front page and in huge letters. How wrong they were on that flop! After reading today’s editorial, which I’m extremely grateful for having, I felt it was written while the editors were holding their noses!

  18. Mr. Lynne Says:

    We tried Takumi and liked it very much. Don’t know Yuyu’s. Also there is always the Osaka Garden in Nashua also (don’t remember their new name though).

    And Fran… yeah, I have friends who had run-ins with the gangs of Charlestown who would give you a quick education on the difference. ;)

  19. Right in Lowell Says:

    Yes you do have the right to change your mind. And we wouldn’t expect a good leftist like you to do anything but endorse Niki now.

    However, judging by how she was attacked on this site by you and others, it makes your support of her less legitimate. Face it. You’re not voting for Niki. You’re voting for a donky on the ballot. She hasn’t changed at all from the person you didn’t think was qualified to hold this office before. You’re the one who’s changed due to party loyalty.

    So please don’t waste space building her up and knocking down Ogonowski. Simply say the truth; “I’m a Democrat, and like all good Democrats, I’ll vote the party and find a way to legitimize it no matter what I’ve said or done before.”

    It’s the American way.

  20. Robby Says:

    Did anyone even notice that the Lowell Police Union endorsed Ogonowski the other day? Who cares what a biased newspaper has to say? (Whether they be pro Republican or Democrat) Clearly, this race is extremely close. It obviously is if Tsongas is forced to call her insider friends to come save her campaign. Since that didn’t help, now they are personally attacking Ogonowski and pretending that his campaign is somehow falling apart. The reality is that it isn’t, I see more and more Ogonowski signs up everyday and I meet more and more Ogonowski supporters. This election is clearly a toss up.

    Ill be voting for Ogonowski next Tuesday because I believe this election is about the people of the 5th MA district, not the President of the United States.

  21. MikeC01824 Says:

    Support the troops by not considering them when you vote, Robby. Of all the rationalizations to vote for Ogonowski, that’s the one that bothers me the most.

    And how do you represent the people of the 5th district when you don’t have the honesty to tell them how you’ll vote? The SCHIP question is just one item, but look at Ogonowski’s website and you won’t even find an issues section.

    I don’t see eye-to-eye with Thomas Golden (my Rep) on every issue, but if you call him he’ll hear you out and he’ll tell you where he stands. Not just around election time, but all the time. Ask anyone and they’ll tell you he’s terrific at this. We should expect no less from someone who’s going to represent us at the federal level.

  22. Robby Says:

    We should support the troops by continuing to fund them so that they can succeed. We should so support for the troops by letting them finish thier job. I have family in Iraq so I can personally tell you that they don’t care about what goes on here politically-they just want a chance to finish thier job.

    As for the issues, if you don’t know where Ogonowski stands, then you probably haven’t been following the camapign that much. I knew Ogonowski’s stance on many issues back in early July.

    How can Niki Tsongas represent that 5th district when she doesn’t even live here?

  23. Mr. Lynne Says:

    He won’t answer a simple question and it left an impression. Pretty straight forward there.

    As to finishing the Job in Iraq… I can’t trust the GOP to get anything right, I’ll be damned if I’ll put them in the position of getting even more wrong when lives are on the line. My fear is that the window to get it right has come and gone. I do believe that it was possible to occupy Iraq and keep law and order laying the ground for a political future for the people of Iraq. So much has passed since that time I’m not sure the genie can be put back in the bottle now. I’m not sure that increased effort now can result in the endgame originally envisioned that the Iraqi people deserve. We let them down and I think fumbling while we try to make it right will only exacerbate the situation.

  24. MrThom Says:

    MikeC01824 Says “The SCHIP question is just one item, but look at Ogonowski’s website and you won’t even find an issues section.” I actually mentioned the lack of position/issues information on Ogo’s site on RedMass and Shawn said the information was widely available and basically I was stupid or lazy.

  25. Mr. Lynne Says:

    Yeah MrT, when Ogo first published his Iraq war position, I went to the website and that position was the only thing I could find. When on BMG the conversation came up on ‘where is Ogo’s issues page?’ the reply was that all his positions are clearly there… in the press releases.

    Sorry… that’s a mark against the campaign, although I’ll be willing to give Ogo himself the benefit of the doubt that others in his campaign are actually at fault on this.

  26. Robby Says:

    “My fear is that the window to get it right has come and gone”

    So, are you implying that our soldiers lost? The Democrats just want to pull our forces out when they have a job to finish. Do you think our soldiers are losing this war? If not, then why pull out now?

  27. Mr. Lynne Says:

    I’m implying that I think Bush screwed up so badly that no amount of military effort will create a multi-ethnic unified, stable Iraq. My fear is that enough people will want our soldiers to ‘win’ so badly that we’ll continue to see the body-count rise. I wonder at what level we’ll arrive before we come realize what won’t work.

    Mind you this is an opinion that is my general impression from paying attention to the details so far. I haven’t really heard a convincing argument that we can win that wasn’t just based on wishful thinking, but I’m willing to hear something that would change my impressions.

    As far as when to ‘pull out’, I guess I’d like to see a credible plan to do so in such a way that minimizes the damage in question. I think whatever wind up doing at this point it will look pretty ugly for the Iraqis.

  28. waittilnextyr Says:

    It is devious to turn the issue from Bush’s catastrophic blunder to a question “do you think our soldiers are losing the war?”

    But whether you admit the failure of policy, or reduce it to military win or lose, I agree with Mr. L that the genie is out of the bottle, or in other terms, all the king’s (Bush) horses and all the king’s men, cannot put Humpty-Dumpty back together again.

    Now that we broke it, we must do two things:
    1) repair it the best we can and leave
    2) never allow an administration to start an unjustified war again.

    But the $700M embassy in Baghdad does not effect repair, and belies our intention to leave. That is not a military problem, but a problem with our government.

  29. Mr. Lynne Says:

    Its devious if the point was about Nikki / Ogo, but I suppose it is a reasonable tangent in and of itself and a legitimate question in that context, which I hope I legitimately answered.

  30. waittilnextyr Says:

    A little more information on the US base in Baghdad:

    Planned cost = $592,000,000, and it is $144,000,000 over budget and not completed.

    BAGHDAD, Iraq - The fortress-like compound rising beside the Tigris River here will be the largest of its kind in the world, the size of Vatican City, with the population of a small town, its own defense force, self-contained power and water, and a precarious perch at the heart of Iraq’s turbulent future.

    The new U.S. Embassy also seems as cloaked in secrecy as the ministate in Rome.

    “We can’t talk about it. Security reasons,” Roberta Rossi, a spokeswoman at the current embassy, said when asked for information about the project.

  31. Mr. Lynne Says:

    Lets stop calling it an embassy and start calling it what it is… a beach-head.

  32. grizzled veteran Says:

    Ogi supporters are missing the point - you can’t win trust when you rotate 360 degrees on every issue and simply invent positions for your candidate.


    Initially, Ogi was for the war until victory was declared, indefinitely - according to the Boston Globe. Then he read the polls, 80% against the war! Suddenly, he’s for complete withdrawal and to quote his recent flyer, Tsongas is for keeping troops in Iraq “indefinitely.” No one believes this and its totally dishonest.

    Ogi is for “a path to citizenship,” quoting from the UMASS Lowell debate, which is being anti-amnesty. Niki, he says, is for a path to citizenship, with mean amnesty to him. Again, totally dishonest.

    Ogi decries both Democrats and Republicans, but he’s for the conservative Republican positions on tax cuts, immigration, health care, SCHIP and the war. Dishonest again. Just Ogi being Ogi.

    Ogi shows his disdain for government, using the example of FEMA. Who ran the military he was part of for 28 years and paid him his salary? Private business? The Town of Dracut? The Heritage Foundation? Noooooo. The United States government! The same government he trashes.

    Nothing Like the Truth

    The Democratic primary was tough, but to the point. The candidates had the integrity to support their claims and positions. Ogi makes no such effort or claim. Really, he and his handlers remind me much more of Nixon than GWB. You don’t get to say things just because you think they’ll sound good to voters.

    One final point. Niki Tsongas lived in Lowell since the late 1960’s. She continued to work at Middlesex Community College even once she had moved to Charlestown. She continued to be on local boards including the Tsongas Arena and Ballpark Commission, Marty Meehan’s 9/11 charity, and many more. Asked whether she would live in Lowell whether she won or lost, Niki said “yes.” Unlike a certain Republican candidate, her word is credible. Is anyone criticizing Mr. Ogonowski for being in the military for 28 years and being ‘out of the district? during portions of that time. That would be absurd. The question is, who will best represent and assist the Fifth District in Washington? On Tuesday, I’m confident that we’ll find out.


  33. Ogo-NOOOOO-wski Says:

    dont let anyone kid you, Ogonowski would have LOVED the Sun’s endorsement!!!

  34. Lynne Says:

    Now we’re just making it too easy!

    From dictionary.com:
    tool /tul/ –noun
    6. a person manipulated by another for the latter’s own ends; cat’s-paw.

    Ogonowski’s a tool. He’s jumped in bed with the insider Republican consultant class of Washington DC.

    But, thank you for playing…

  35. Shawn Says:

    Ogonowski’s “path to citizenship” treads nicely through their home country. He’s been very consistent on that.

  36. Lynne Says:

    But those people still broke the law, so why should there be ANY path or any preference given to them at all? Or at least, that’s the impression he leaves in regards to his view.

    Then he says “path to citizenship” after calling Niki’s view “amnesty.” How is adding one extra step of them going home and coming back not amnesty then?

    Where is the “amnesty line” drawn? Methinks it’s really just arbitrary and whatever Ogo says it is.


  37. joe Says:

    Amnesty has become a meaningless buzzword. Have you ever actually seen someone who uses it define what it means? Or indicate what policies count as amnesty?

    You don’t, because most people think it means one thing, and the anti-immigrant people use it to describe everything short of a policy imposing the largest forced migration in the history of the western hemisphere.

  38. Right in Lowell Says:

    “Tsongas, if she knows what’s good for her, should back away quickly from this action by Emily’s List. It’s very dishonest, and it tarnishes Tsongas to be associated with it. Now is the time we will find out if Tsongas is more interested in winning and fundraising, or honesty and integrity. (For the record, my money’s on the former - winning and fundraising. I hope she proves me wrong.)”

    That my friends, is the word for word writings of Lynne on June 26, 2007, in regards to Emily’s List working on behalf of Tsongas in the primary.

    Today, she’ll have us believe that Jim Ogonowski, and only Jim Ogonowski, is a tool of Washington insiders. Meanwhile, Emily’s List continues to run ads for the Tsongas campaign, while Bill Clinton and Nancy Pelosi have come from Washington (or wherever the former Philanderer in Chief calls home these days) to stump for Niki.

    I say the only tool is Lynne and anyone who refuses to challenge her hypocrisy.

  39. Right in Lowell Says:

    As for the troops question, did anyone else notice that at the last Democratic debate, the earliest any of the front-runners (Clinton, Obama and Edwards) said ALL troops would be home from Iraq is 4-5 years?

    If that’s the case, and since Congress has no power to bring the troops home, only cut their funding (and we know they don’t have the sack to do that), why are we even discussing the issue in this race?

    Let’s talk illegal immigration, let’s talk taxes, fiscal policy and priorities, let’s talk Health Insurance, let’s talk anything relevant. But please, enough of this bring the hoops home. Marty Meehan was there and couldn’t do it. It won’t make a difference no matter which of these two gets elected.

  40. Lynne Says:

    RiL: have you bothered to read what I’ve written in the last day? I’ve mentioned EL twice in a negative way. You continue to fool yourself into thinking you have any leg to stand on here. I’ve also mentioned (twice) that the grassroots efforts by Tsongas have been really surprising, and that she is not relying on the sort of things I thought she was going to.

    Yes, it was disappointing she didn’t distance herself from the actions of EL. But Niki is still a good candidate. And certainly, leaps and bounds ahead of a guy who can’t even tell us how he would vote on KEY legislation. Or be reality-based on Iraq. Or stop his shrill and inconsistent anti-immigration stands.

    I don’t have a problem with Clinton coming out (it was actually quite fun except the waiting since he wound up driving because the plane was down). Hey, sorry our ex-president is way more popular than the total failure that occupies the White House right now. But how is his rally relevant in any way?

    You still have yet to say one thing that sounds like a logical statement. *shrug*

  41. Muronao Says:

    “She hasn’t changed at all from the person you didn’t think was qualified to hold this office before”

    You understand, right, that the calculus of who you support changes based on, oh, say, who’s running? I don’t care for Niki much and didn’t support her in the primary because there were far better candidates. But compared to Ogi, she’s the best option. It’s not that difficult. For example, Bush is an unqualified disaster running against any human being, but against Satan, he’d start to look just slightly better. Not in the abstract but IN COMPARISON, he’d be the better choice there.

  42. Mr. Lynne Says:

    “I say the only tool is Lynne and anyone who refuses to challenge her hypocrisy.”

    Its amusing that she rates such a high priority in your life.

  43. Lynne Says:

    Folks, there’s no logic that will move this conversation into a productive direction. (But well put, Muronao).

  44. Right in Lowell Says:

    “RiL: have you bothered to read what I’ve written in the last day? I’ve mentioned EL twice in a negative way. You continue to fool yourself into thinking you have any leg to stand on here. I’ve also mentioned (twice) that the grassroots efforts by Tsongas have been really surprising, and that she is not relying on the sort of things I thought she was going to.”

    Yes Lynne. I can read. Have you bothered to read what I’ve said? You criticize Emily’s List, but not Tsongas for accepting their support. Yet you have no problem criticizing both the national Republicans AND

  45. Right in Lowell Says:

    Sorry about that. Hit the wrong button.

    As I was saying, you have no problem criticizing the National Republicans AND Ogonowski for accepting their support. Why the inconsistency? If one is a tool, isn’t the other?

    BTW, I’m not disgreeing with you that Niki is a good candidate. She’s a great candidate, as I tried to point out to you in the primary when you were ripping her. It’s a shame you didn’t see the light earlier. It would make it easier for you to support her now and not sound hypocritical.

  46. Mr. Lynne Says:

    The way the GOP operates, its members have no choice but to be a tool.

    Read about it.

  47. joe Says:

    As for the troops question, did anyone else notice that at the last Democratic debate, the earliest any of the front-runners (Clinton, Obama and Edwards) said ALL troops would be home from Iraq is 4-5 years?

    If that’s the case, and since Congress has no power to bring the troops home, only cut their funding (and we know they don’t have the sack to do that), why are we even discussing the issue in this race?

    Because the pressure the Democrats have put on the Republicans has forced them into much more responsible positions. You don’t hear the Republican candidates making breezy statements about “We still have troops in Germany 60 years later,” anymore, do you?

    Because “ALL troops” is a nice little bit of misdirection on your part, a rather transparent attempt to pretend that keeping 168,000 troops patrolling Iraq urban areas and, say, 7000 troops protecting the Kurds and mopping up al Qaeda bases are the same thing.

    Because now even Republicans are talking about winding down the war - actively promoting a position that they spent the last five years calling people traitors and cowards, and insisting they would never support. Now, they have capitulated to what the Democrats have been saying - let’s call it the Dean/Murtha Plan - and are reduced to arguing that they support it, too.

    And, finally, because the election of Nikki Tsongas will be yet another defeat for the Iraq War Party, and it is important for the anti-war majority to keep sending its message loud and clear to Washington, or they’ll backslide.

  48. joe Says:

    Oh, and also, because “ALL troops our” refers to the END of with withdrawal, when the question at hand is about the BEGINNING of the withdrawal.

  49. Right in Lowell Says:

    Joe, another pretty well reasoned argument. You should think about hosting your own blog.

    Now then, ALL troops is not a misdirection. It’s a central part of the argument. What happens to those left behind when they’re outnumbered and being attacked? That’s why it’s important not to bring the troops home until the job is done, or just admit defeat and get them all out of there ASAP. I’ll assume we understand each other’s positions on this, so I won’t bother getting into it.

    As for Congress sending a message, what message has the Pelosi Congress sent? They bang the anti-war drums, blow lots of fire and rhetoric, and in the end, we’ve seen a troop SURGE, not reduction under their watch. Again, we can disagree on whether this is right or wrong, but there’s no denying Congress is powerless in this issue. Only the President can make those types of decisions. All Congress can do is cut funding, which they don’t have the guts to do (rightfully so, BTW).

    If you want the troops home, you’ll have to wait till Hillary gets elected. If she gets elected. But don’t be too surprised if when she does get in, she holds the line in Iraq too. Her hubby was a pretty strong anti-war guy too, and he had no problem committing troops when he thought it was justified. Judging by the way she hedges her bets when discussing the war and troops, something tells me she’s not much different than him and that when she becomes commander in chief, she’ll take the role seriously instead of resorting to empty campaign rhetoric and Senate floor bickering.

  50. waittilnextyr Says:

    “All Congress can do is cut funding, which they don’t have the guts to do (rightfully so, BTW).”

    Or, pass the special progressive “war tax”, and specifically include those who profit from the war. That would get some attention to bringing this to a conclusion, and prevent future irresponsible authorizations.

  51. Mr. Lynne Says:

    God forbid we hurt ourselves (with a tax) before we yoke our children with our stupidity.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

[powered by WordPress.]

If you are not on Twitter and want to follow our feed on Facebook, click "Like" for our FB page.
BadgermillCity logo


Recent Posts