Progressive Steps Forward in Kentucky

Two small but positive signs of political and social progress here in the still-red Bluegrass State:

DINO Rep. Ben Chandler, D-KY6, has bolstered his pre-primary endorsement of Barack Obama with a post-Iraq-trip endorsement of withdrawing troops.

After making his first whirlwind trip through Iraq over the weekend, Democratic U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler said the United States should begin to withdraw troops now and force the Iraqi government to stand on its own.

”As long as we continue to fund this thing and as long as we continue to provide security, there is less incentive for the Iraqi government to do the things they need to do to control the country,“ Chandler told the Herald-Leader. ”I think we need to leave them with as stable a situation as we can but we need to lift off from the country as soon as possible."

What, didn't Chandler rate the everything's-hunky-dory tour treatment that McBush gets?

(More after the jump.)

As Media Czech says:

I feel it is the responsibility of all grassroots activists and KY bloggers to criticize our own when we let us down, and praise our own when they stand up for us. To do otherwise is not only dishonest, it greatly hurts our own cause. (ahem!)

PS- I'm personally taking time out of my day to call Ben's office and thank him for these words on Iraq and the way he's conducted himself this year. I strongly encourage you to do the same.

D.C.- Phone: (202)-225-4706
Lex- Phone: (859) 219-1366

The same day as Ben's epiphany, repug tool Governor Steve Beshear appointed Progressive Icon Ernesto Scorsone to a Circuit Judgeship.

Scorsone said he was honored by the appointment.

"Lexington has a strong tradition of an excellent bench and I hope to continue that," he said.

Scorsone, a Lexington attorney, will serve until the Nov. 4 general election to replace Sheila Isaac, who stepped down to enter the senior judge program.

Scorsone, 56, is the only person thus far to file papers to run in November for the circuit court seat. The deadline to file is Aug. 12.

It'll be interesting to see if the repugs put anyone up to run against Ernesto. They failed to challenge him for reelection either this year or in 2004, even though he was the most liberal member of the General Assembly. His freedom from opposition could be because his Lexington senate district is heavily Democratic and liberal and its voters revere Scorsone.

But the Circuit Court District in Lexington encompasses all of Fayette County, including the republican southern suburbs. If the repugs let Judge Scorsone run unchallenged, it'll be the strongest sign yet that republicans are as endangered in Kentucky as they are nationally.

The Herald neglects to mention that Ernesto Scorsone was the only openly gay member of the Kentucky General Assembly, and is apparently the only openly gay Circuit Judge in Kentucky.

I hope the reason the Herald chose not to mention this significant facet of Sen. Scorsone's biography is because it is irrelevant to his qualifications for Circuit Judge.

It is, however, highly relevant to the state of civil liberties and tolerance in the Commonwealth.

Cross-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "Progressive Steps Forward in Kentucky" >>

Boy, is John Edwards wrong – or deceiving – on Iraq

In an interview today, Edwards claimed there’s not that much difference among Democratic candidates on Iraq and that voters know that:

“My instinct is that most caucus-goers think any of us will end the war.”

Just plain wrong. You’re one of the three Democratic “front-runners” who do NOT have a plan, desire, goal, or intention of getting us OUT and not halfway out of Iraq. No exceptions, no stipulations, nothing short of getting us out qualifies as getting us out.

There's more: "Boy, is John Edwards wrong – or deceiving – on Iraq" >>

Iraq semi-withdrawal bill ‘has more holes than Swiss cheese’

That’s our Democratic Congress! Is this the best it can do?

The Democrats; flagship proposal on Iraq is aimed at bringing most troops home. Yet if enacted, the law would still allow for tens of thousands of U.S. troops to stay deployed for years to come. … For those who want troops out, “you’ve got more holes in here than Swiss cheese,” said Tom Andrews, national director of the war protest group Win Without War and a former congressman from Maine.

Loophole No. 1, of course, is this:

The proposal also sets a goal of ending combat by Dec. 15, 2008.

After that, troops remaining in Iraq would be restricted to three missions: counterterrorism, training Iraqi security forces and protecting U.S. assets, including diplomats.

With all three exceptions, you have the “hot pursuit” issue, and what if it escalates? In the last month or so before the Battle of the Bulge, when more and more of limited U.S. supplies were shifted north to the U.S. First Army, or even to the British 21st Army Group, Gen. Patton would find ways of deliberately expanding extended reconnoiterings and limited counteroffenses into actual battles.

Proof positive that’s what could happen in Iraq?

Maj. Gen. Michael Barbero, deputy chief of staff for operations in Iraq, declined to estimate how many troops might be needed under the Democrats' plan but said it would be hard to accomplish any of those missions without a significant force.

“It’s a combination of all of our resources and capabilities to be able to execute these missions the way that we are,” Barbero said in a recent phone interview from Baghdad.

For example, Barbero said that “several thousand” troops are assigned to specialized anti-terrorism units focused on capturing high profile terrorist targets. But they often rely on the logistics, security and intelligence provided by conventional troops, he said.

“When a brigade is operating in a village, meeting with locals, asking questions, collecting human intelligence on these very same (terrorist) organizations, that intelligence comes back and is merged and fed into this counterterrorism unit,” Barbero said. “So are they doing counterterrorism operations?

“It’s all linked and simultaneous,” he added. “You can’t separate it cleanly like that.”

On the training issue, what if Iraqi soldiers and security units prove as unwilling to take to training over the next 2-3 years as they have the last 2-3? Are Congressional Democrats, PLUS, the next president, should he or she be a Democrat, going to just pound more sand down that rathole?

Oh, and don’t expect attitudes to greatly change after Jan. 20, 2009. Too many Democrats are invested in the Bipartisan Foreign Policy Consensus™.

There's more: "Iraq semi-withdrawal bill ‘has more holes than Swiss cheese’" >>

John McCain should know better on the Iraq War and “honor”

McCain’s latest claim as to why we must stay in Iraq is that U.S. honor would suffer if we pull out now.

Really?

When was the last time we heard talk of “peace with honor”?

Wasn’t it from, oh, 1969-1973, as mouthed by Tricky Dick and Henry K?

Didn’t “peace with honor” get us the same peace terms as North Vietnam was seeking in 1968?

In other words, he spent an extra five years in captivity, ignoring his rejecting an out-of-sequence repatriation, for the sake of honor that got us no better peace terms than five years earlier.

There's more: "John McCain should know better on the Iraq War and “honor”" >>

Amen to Lynn Woolsey: Let’s have some Dems get anti-war primary challenges

That’s what California Democratic Congresswoman Woolsey says herself:

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) is encouraging anti-war activists to find challengers to centrist Democrats, with the aim of moving the party to the left and ramping up opposition to the war in Iraq, to the chagrin of top Democratic aides.

“You folks should go after the Democrats,” Woolsey said in response to a suggestion from an activist during a conference call last month organized by the Network of Spiritual Progressives.

“I’d hate to lose the majority, but I’m telling you, if we don’t stand up to our responsibility, maybe that’s the lesson to be learned.”

Democratic leaders have yet to punish Woolsey for her stance, but their aides were irked by and dismissive of Woolsey’s remarks.

“The political reality is that the real targets of the outside groups should be Republicans who have so far refused to join the overwhelming majority of Democrats in voting for a change of course in Iraq,” a top aide said.

Ahh, the current Democratic Congressional leadership: shoot the message as well as the messenger.

Oh, let’s take Ms. Woolsey’s call one step further.

Let’s have more liberal bloggers beating the drum for Green Party or socialist candidates for the general election, too. I intend to do so.

Oh, on a sidebar note, I’d like to say Kevin Drum really fucked up on this post saying that Kucinch and other second-tier Democrats, most of whom are more ardently anti-war than the “big dogs,” need to pack up, quit the primary campaign, and go home.

Cross-posted at Socratic Gadfly and Out of Iraq Bloggers Caucus.

There's more: "Amen to Lynn Woolsey: Let’s have some Dems get anti-war primary challenges" >>