Kerry Steps Up...Who Will Respond? by Tom Hayden

[kpete]

Kerry Steps Up...Who Will Respond?
Submitted by JonathanSchwarz on Sat, 2006-04-08 15:19. Iraq War
by Tom Hayden

Sen. John Kerry's call for a withdrawal from Iraq, published last Sunday in the New York Times, is the strongest anti-war stand yet taken by a national Democratic leader. The anti-war movement should strongly demand that other elected officials support Kerry's position, and that of Rep. John Murtha in the House, if only to show that there is a public constituency for the politics of peace.

If Kerry, the 2004 nominee, can be isolated in his own party for favoring withdrawal, it will reveal the fatal decline of progressive Democratic politics and perhaps set the stage for the coming presidential primaries, with Kerry either as a conscience or a candidate. The same has happened with Sen. Russ Feingold, a more likely candidate at this point. Feingold's more cautious and conditional call for setting a deadline for withdrawal has gone nowhere among Senate Democrats, nor has his resolution censuring the President received much Senate support beyond Tom Harkin and Barbara Boxer.

Feingold has the option of taking his case to the country in the presidential primaries, where his positions will be strongly supported in the early primaries.

Will Kerry, a much more formidable candidate, take the same course? No one can be certain, but the primary winds are blowing in the direction of peace and progressive politics. Sen. Hillary Clinton, the seemingly invincible front-runner, is not likely to emerge from Iowa and New Hampshire unscathed. Her hardline support of the Iraq War is not only mistaken and immoral, but appears to many voters as chronic opportunism. Unless the war suddenly ends, her credibility will suffer severely in the primaries.

This is why the "Kerry factor" becomes important. As the former nominee, Kerry commands media and public attention. As an anti-war voice, he is in sharp contrast with the silence of the lambs. As a potential presidential contender, he is a credible foil to the centrist hawks and challenges the party leaderhip to make up its mind.

more at:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/9998

[babylonsister]

1. I'm also wondering who will respond. This 2-week hiatus doesn't

help at all.

[saltpoint]

2. A clear-headed and gracious observation by Tom Hayden.

If a panel of truth-tellers were to be formed (and we can always use one when Republicans are in power), Tom Hayden would be a must-have-participant.

[Beelzebud]

3. Too bad Biden threw him under the bus on Maher last night...

He made the comment that Kerry blew it for setting a date.

[TayTay]

4. That's not surprising. Biden doesn't believe in withdrawal dates.

Most of the Democratic Senators aren't 'there' yet in terms of accepting that the US can't do much to stabilize Iraq. And it is a complicated argument. Sens. Biden and Clinton and a host of others may genuinely believe that we are still capable of doing some lasting good in IRaq.

I don't think the American people are on that page anymore. I think the American people have been patient for long enough and now want to see some thing besides the stalemate that we have. I think the Kerry and Murtha position will become more attractive the more people see them. We can't stay in Iraq indefinitely. We have to have some way to start to get out.

[MH1]

7. Biden

Just likes to hear himself talk.

And oh yeah he wants to run for Prez himself so he has to be critical of every other possible candidate. :eyes:

(too bad for Biden that his competition is Hillary, not Kerry).

[PSPS]

5. Kerry is a "national Democratic leader?"

I mostly tuned out after the first sentence because of that canard. I don't pay any attention to what John ("reporting for duty") Kerry says anymore. That tail between his legs is too distracting.

Hayden hits some good points in his description of the opportunistic Hillary Clinton, though. It's really pathetic how some otherwise left-leaning bloggers, like the torture apologist Bartcop, go to run interference for Hillary, saying that it was somehow "understandable" that she gave bush "the benefit of the doubt" while he lied us into his war crimes. Never mind those millions of marchers in the street, fearlessly calling bush a liar and demanding "no war in Iraq." Hillary knew better because, um, because who'd ever imagine bush might be lying?

[MH1]

6. Of course he is. Pres nominee and all that.

Oh, silly reason, huh?

:shrug:

Do you have anything good to say about any Dem btw? Interesting how your entire post is to trash leading Democrats. Hmmm.