Subject: Ron Kind's vote: via Coulee Region Progressives Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 07:05:08 -0600 Message-ID: <B14120EE5C432443B21102F7925DAD02038F5809@COKE.uwec.edu> From: "Hale, C. Kate" <HALECL@uwec.edu>
Colleagues,
From a listserve out of LaCrosse--a snippet--just in case you hadn't
seen this last week . . . . FYI.
Kate
************************************************************************
*********************************
Bush, Cheney And Ron Kind
The Capital Times :: EDITORIAL :: 8A
Wednesday, January 4, 2006
When the U.S. House voted just before the holiday break on whether the
U.S. military should remain in Iraq until "victory" has been achieved,
the choice was a simple one.
Members who voted yes were saying that they were willing to cede their
responsibility to provide checks and balances on the executive branch
and to simply allow President Bush and Vice President Cheney to maintain
the occupation of Iraq for as long as they choose. Since the
administration has not offered even the most minimal standard for how
"victory" might be defined, a yes vote was, effectively, an endorsement
of an open-ended commitment to sacrifice as many more American lives --
and American tax dollars -- as Bush and Cheney demand in the pursuit of
what most serious observers now admit is a fool's mission.
Members who voted no were saying that they want the Congress to play a
role in defining how long U.S. troops should continue to occupy Iraq, as
well as the goals of that occupation and the point at which a decision
might be made to end it. Considering the sorry track record of the Bush
administration when it comes to telling the truth about why the U.S. is
in Iraq, and the delusional claims the president and vice president have
made regarding the "success" of the mission, this was the only rational
vote.
Predictably, the four Republican members of Wisconsin's House delegation
voted yes. Representatives Mark Green, Paul Ryan, James Sensenbrenner
and Tom Petri ceased to think for themselves long ago. They are merely
rubber stamps for whatever the administration wants. Members of the
Supreme Soviet were more likely to challenge Joe Stalin than these
characters are likely to challenge Bush.
To their credit, three of the state's four Democratic representatives --
Tammy Baldwin, Gwen Moore and the dean of the delegation, Dave Obey --
voted no. Along with the 109 other House members who opposed the
resolution, they are in the forefront of the House minority that is
seeking to reassert a congressional role in foreign policy. They are, as
well, part of the growing coalition of House Democrats and Republicans
who are seeking a sane and workable solution to the crisis that is Iraq.
Unfortunately, the fourth Democrat in the Wisconsin delegation, La
Crosse's Ron Kind, voted yes. Kind's vote reinforced the notion that he
does not know where he stands. He was the only Democrat in the state's
House delegation to vote to authorize Bush to go the war. Then, under
pressure from his constituents, he led a prewar effort to get the
administration to clarify its goals and to answer core questions from
Congress. Since the war began, Kind has tried to straddle the issues,
seeking to sound critical of the administration and its war when he
comes home to Wisconsin, and then voting with Bush and Cheney in
Washington.
Kind needs to get serious about the most serious issue facing the
nation. If he sincerely backs the administration's wrong-minded
approach, then he should say so and let western Wisconsin Democrats
decide whether the incumbent will face a primary challenge from a
Democrat who is more in tune with the region's anti-war sentiments. If,
on the other hand, he recognizes that the occupation has gone horribly
awry, then he should join Baldwin, Moore, Obey and U.S. Sen. Russ
Feingold, D-Middleton, in seeking a way out of the quagmire.
With his vote on the "victory" resolution, Kind has put himself in the
service of Bush and Cheney. If that is where he chooses to remain, then
he will deserve the same electoral fate as the other apologists for this
administration.