Perennial candidate Mark Wilson, who previously ran for Congress as a Libertarian and for Senate as a Green, and who is now mounting a primary challenge to Sen. Maria Cantwell (I suppose as a Democrat,) likes to point to his endorsement by Snohomish County’s 38th Legislative District Democrats as evidence that his is a serious challenge. Well, no more.
The Democratic Party in Snohomish County’s 38th Legislative District has rescinded its endorsement of Mark Wilson, the anti-war candidate running a longshot primary campaign against Sen. Maria Cantwell.
The endorsement has been brought up by Wilson backers as an official sign of support for the protest candidate. Cantwell has been dogged by anti-war Democrats who say she should renounce her 2002 vote to authorize the Iraq invasion.
But Rep. John McCoy, D-Tulalip, thought it was important to “show unity of the Democratic Party behind Maria Cantwell.”
On Monday, the 38th District Democrats voted to endorse Cantwell and to rescind Wilson’s endorsement.
Wilson said the move was done out of “reactionary fear for self-preservation.”
Yeah, well, I suppose one could try to spin this as “reactionary fear,” though instead, I’d say it reeks of something that some anti-war activists find even more distasteful: political pragmatism. Like others, I find Wilson to be an affable guy, but his quixotic primary campaign is nothing but a minor distraction from the real election in November.
The 38th LD Dems, whatever their majority position on the war is — and I’m guessing that like most Democrats their position is that they’d like to get out — have recognized the fact that Sen. Cantwell is the party’s nominee, and that if we want a shot at retaking the Senate and turning this nation around, we all need to rally behind her the way, you know… Republicans rally behind their candidates. Even Sen. Russ Feingold, perhaps the Dems’ most vocal anti-war leader, came to Seattle to stump for Sen. Cantwell, because he knows that the best way to promote his agenda is to give his party control of the Senate.
Wilson finds all this undemocratic:
“The incumbents are determined to protect each other over and beyond any Democratic values or rules,” he said.
Uh-huh. The rules were followed when the 38th endorsed Wilson, and the rules were followed when they rescinded it. That’s democracy, Mark. You lost. (I’d say, “get used to it” but he already has.)
Darcy Burner hugged a rabbit weeks ago, but as of this morning do-nothing congressman Reichert has done nothing about hugging a rabbit.
Pragmatism? This outrage reeks of grassroots democracy.
Chad slid the original Wilson endorsement through (9-7) late in the meeting, and openly observed that a better-publicized vote would have gone the other way.
It’s democracy, Chad. Democracy. Something wrong with that?
RonK >”…It’s democracy, Chad. Democracy. Something wrong with that?”
as we all know, unless the whiners win it isn`t democracy
“Politics is just high school with guns and more money” – Frank Zappa
Cantwell should re-think her position on one of the most disastrous episodes in American foreign policy.
4
Of course she should, and it goes without saying that her support of Bush’s misbegotten war rankles the majority of rank-and-file Washington Democrats. But let’s not forget what her position is.
Cantwell has said she voted for an authorization to use war as a last resort, and assumed Bush would first work through the U.N. and exhaust peaceful avenues. Yeah, yeah, we pay U.S. Senators to not be fooled by liars, but Bush fooled a LOT of people. Hindsight is always clearer; we now know Bush was as lying warmonger who schemed to attack Iraq long before 9/11 and even before the 2000 election. How was Cantwell supposed to know that, when Bush and his handlers worked feverishly to keep their evil plotting secret? and when Bush himself, in campaign speeches and presidential debates, LIED to the world about his intentions?
Cantwell’s current position is, now that we’re in Iraq, we can’t just pull out because that would create a dangerous power vacuum that will be filled by our enemies. Whether you like it or not, she’s right. The argument for a pullout becomes stronger if you view Iraq as a military defeat in which persistence can only make things worse, and that argument becomes stronger every day. But Cantwell’s position is evolving, too, and will continue to change with the circumstances. I believe her recent statements do represent a change in her previous position and that she will continue to respond to evolving circumstances.
While her overall position on Iraq is not what I would have chosen in our Senate representation, I believe Cantwell’s pragmatic approach to the issue and her willingness to re-evaluate over time is within the bounds of reasonableness. My disagreement with her on this issue is not enough to cause me to withhold my vote or otherwise put a pro-war, pro-torture, corporatist Republican in one of our state’s U.S. Senate seats.
Roger – “How was Cantwell supposed to know”? Well, gee, how come Patty Murray figured out that committing unprovoked war was a really stupid, immoral thing to do, and said so on the floor of the Senate?
How come roughly 40,000 Seattle citizens knew it when they marched against this war on Feb.15, 2003?
How come Norm Dicks and Adam Smith have both pubclicly stated that if they knew then what they know now they would never have voted for the war resolution? That they realize it was a terible mistake.
Cantwell still will not admit her mistake. She is all alone among Washington’s Democrats, and her squirelly position on the issue makes no sense at all. I don’t give a fig about Mark Wilson, Hong Tran, Aaron Dixon or anyone else. None of them were ever serious challenges to Cantwell. This election was always hers to lose, and if she does it won’t be because Democratic constituents have demanded clear answers on her support for the war that has made us more enemies than we can count. It will be because she refused to give clear answers. She will still get my vote come November. But this is a hole she dug for herself.
Mark Wilson? Who the hell is Mark Wilson?
Despite a blizzard of negative press coverage, Ann Coulter’s new book “Godless: The Church of Liberalism” has surged all the way to No. 1 on Amazon.com’s list of bestsellers — just two days after its official publication. [hehe] JCH
I don’t agree that Cantwell “didn’t know”, or was “fooled”, by the Iraq war vote. She, and many others, were boxed into a corner by the Republican strategy. The vote was taken early enough, with the “negotiate first” provision, so that (a) voting against it would have obviously made any future negotiations with Saddam fruitless, as he would then know Bush’s threats would have no teeth to them, and (b) any Democrates voting against the provision could be branded as a “friend of Saddam”, since their vote encouraged him to defy UN sanctions with impunity. Cantwell didn’t have a real choice, knowing what she did then.
Perhaps with 20-20 hindsight, realizing the WMD claims to be bogus, Democrats such as Cantwell might have voted differently. But they were relying on the same intelligence the Bush administration was putting forward, not knowing that the intelligence analysis had been tainted toward what Bush wanted to believe.
But Bush should have done what his father did (after much persuasion): go back to the Congress and ask for authority to start the war. At least then you have a real debate over going to war, rather than a vote on a hypothetical situation which really ended up being a delegation of authority to Bush to make the decision for Congress.
Patty Murray voted against the Iraq War Resolution and won re-election handily.
Let’s be clear here. Maria’s refusal to deny that she should have taken a different course about the war is an indication that she thinks it was a good idea.
Your back-to-back posts, Wilson Ditched/Help Maria, explain why Mark Wilson was buzzing around in the first place. Cantwell can’t be trusted.
Why should there be any worries over a Dem who ought to know how to vote on such a wing nutty issues? If you trusted her, you wouldn’t have to be worried about what ought to be slam-dunk “No” votes. But you were just a little bit worried, weren’t you? Well, so are the people who are digging in and opposing her, or worse still, refusing to ring doorbells for her, even after Russ asked nicely.
On some issues, her leadership is hyper focused, but her refusal to back down on her war vote is the of leadership and strength. If ever there was a state where she could safely say, “I fucked up!” it’s WA.
Her refusal pisses me off because it’s already putting her reelection at risk. If McGavick wins, (don’t laugh at this possibility, look at Ohio) who will be blamed? The goons who hacked the vote, who suppressed the vote, or the outspoken pocket of Dems who were frustrated with her arrogance and just stayed home?
@4
Thanks for the link, Harry. Truly frightening when even Joni is advising her to lighten up.
Different view than that of the far left on who voted for the wqar or not, but some of you folks are way out in left field on the subject. Sorry about the spelling and grammer errors just had eyes lasered today.
FACT. The world would be safer if we’d never gone to Iraq. We had less to fear from Iraq when Sadaam was in power. Now we’ve created a haven for terror that will most certainly end up with attacks on our soil, something that would have NEVER happened if Baby Bush had followed his own father’s advice. Papa Bush said to stay out of Iraq. Baby Bush didn’t listen. Now we’re all at risk. When the terrorists make their way here, and believe me they will, I hope they start with Ann Coulter’s neighborhood.
Commentby LeftTurn— 6/8/06@ 6:41 am
LeftTurn you have a mind of a defeatist and the President did not stay out of Iraq. The problem he made was not finishing the job the first time. You also forgot Sept 11 2001 those folks were not our local home grown terrorists and their object has not changed. The next neighborhood they set up camp in will more than likely be Bagdad Jim McDermott. The other bad news for you is that they are already living here and probably making plans to enhance your personal fears. The biggest risks that this nation is not from the terrorist but folks like you who cannot control your own personnel emollition and fears. We in the military call that the Chicken Little syndrome (the sky is falling! the sky is falling!). The other piece of bad news is that they respect Ann Coulter’s more than folks like yourself. The other theory is folks like you are a greater threat to them than this Nation Military or any Christian groups. They base that on the many attacks that your friends make on the military and their Christian supporters. They do not want to be your next victim. They see your hatred for President Bush and your willingness to abandoned the troops and encourage treason just to get even for your emotional loss. This nation has made major changes in the world the last forty years and some folks really did not buy into the plan. That is probability the root cause for the many problems in this world. That would be the case no matter who was the major power leading other Nations into the future.
Christ….if Norm Dicks was able to admit he got snookered on Iraq, what the hell is Cantwell’s problem?
So klake, you’re voting for Maria, then?
I’d like to know what issues this stubborn woman has that this blog author finds so attractive ? Sure the enviroment, while Seattle spews more poison into Puget Sound , making the Duwamish River an ecological sewer , while saving a few caribou in Alaska .
Is it the goal of this good woman to continue meddling in projects in other states and nations , to satisfy the duplicitous goal of Seattle liberals that can’t see the trees for their personal smog ?
The trouble with a prowar Democrat is that the “butter” issues will always be compromised in order to sustain the war machine , It’s expensive to ” liberate ” other countries . The absence of war is where Progressive goals flourish , not side by side with an occupation army .
Let’s look at ANWR , Cantwell wants to save the Alaska enviroment , so her energy policy amounts to destoying the enviroment in Iraq , not to mention their standard of living . And this is acceptable to the Democratic Party of Washington ?? I wonder if war contributes to global warming , not enough to persuade democratic supporters of Maria Cantwell . I wonder why Iraq is an acceptable place to destroy human dignity ? for the good and future Democratic Party ?
rhp6033 @ 8:“Perhaps with 20-20 hindsight, realizing the WMD claims to be bogus, Democrats such as Cantwell might have voted differently. But they were relying on the same intelligence the Bush administration was putting forward, not knowing that the intelligence analysis had been tainted toward what Bush wanted to believe.”
Excuse me, one of the main reasons Democrats felt compelled to vote for the Iraq resolution was the groundwork of 8 years of Clinton Administration also telling them of the threat of Saddam’s WMD. The lines “Saddam has a WMD program” and “Saddam is a threat” did not start with this president. If the Clinton Administration had downplayed the threat in the 90s, what Democrat in their right mind would have voted for this resolution, even after 9/11?
Also, why do you give any president the authority to do something then profess outrage when he exercises it, in any circumstance? When Congress voted to give the president authority to go, even without an explicit UN resolution, did anyone think, oh gee, we’re not really serious about that part?
John Kerry has stepped up and said Congress must accept some responsibility for Iraq, and more people should do the same. Certainly the voters will think so come fall.
John Kerry has stepped up and said Congress must accept some responsibility for Iraq, and more people should do the same. Certainly the voters will think so come fall.
Commentby Kyle Broflovski— 6/8/06@ 1:43 pm
Great point Kyle and I heard other folks make the same statement.
TRENTON, N.J. – Commentator Ann Coulter’s incendiary words about outspoken 9/11 widows have led two state lawmakers to calls for a boycott of her book in the widows’ home state of New Jersey. Assemblywomen Joan M. Quigley, D-Hudson, and Linda Stender, D-Union, on Thursday called on New Jerseyans to stop buying the book, “Godless: The Church of Liberalism,” and for retailers in the state to stop selling it. ……………………………………………………………………JCH’s Followup: Despite a blizzard of negative press coverage, Ann Coulter’s new book “Godless: The Church of Liberalism” has surged all the way to No. 1 on Amazon.com’s list of bestsellers – just two days after its official publication. [hehe] JCH
RE: #17…Seems to me Clinton and his people neither hyped nor downplayed the issue of Saddam…they just dealt with the problem. In so doing, they sufficiently emasculated him as to make it possible for the current administration to go charging into Iraq, making Bush look like a hero and Rumsfeld like a military genius.
Since then they’ve pretty well squandered that by stumbling around with their fingers up their butts. Now they’ll take all the credit for the diligent work of some of the real, competent, hard-working professionals in the military in nailing one of the remaining bad guys.
This is of course assuming that nailing Zarquai was completely on the up-and-up…somehow it seems awfully convenient that the house he was in was blown to bits but his corpse was left with the face intact to make such a nice picture.
This is of course assuming that nailing Zarquai was completely on the up-and-up…somehow it seems awfully convenient that the house he was in was blown to bits but his corpse was left with the face intact to make such a nice picture.
Commentby ArtFart— 6/8/06@ 3:46 pm
ArtFart it depends where you were standing when the bombs drop. We had a pilot who was a prison of war who had a bomb drop by his bed and went to the cellar, blew up and he didn’t receive one scratch. The point being made when it’s your time is up there is nothing you can do about it.
So klake, you’re voting for Maria, then?
Commentby Harry Tuttle— 6/8/06@ 12:38 pm
I will support anyone who isn’t a Socialist Democrat, and maintains good values and principles.
And it’s pretty funny reading the whinging coming from the Wilson camp. They gamed the system to obtain the original endorsement. I have to imagine that if they had simply gone for a dual endorsement, most people wouldn’t have cared. Instead, they overreached. Never a good idea when the vast majority of the people in the district don’t actually want to endorse your candidate.
I guess this demonstrates that the grassroots of the Democratic party obviously hates the… grassroots.
By the by, Klake…let me make it clear that in no way whatsoever would I argue that the world is going to miss zarqawi a heck of a lot. Doesn’t sound like there was much to like about the guy.
A friend of mine was an EMT for years, and wrestled for a while with trying to explain why some people got really messed up in fires/accidents/whatever would survive, while others who didn’t seem to be badly injured wouldn’t make it in spite of the rescuers’ best efforts. He finally came to the same conclusion you suggest above–if it’s your time to go, you go, and if not, you don’t.
The lines “Saddam has a WMD program” and “Saddam is a threat” did not start with this president. If the Clinton Administration had downplayed the threat in the 90s, what Democrat in their right mind would have voted for this resolution, even after 9/11?
Most observers agree that Saddam’s actual WMD capability ended after Clinton’s airstrikes in 1998. Most of the “Democrats thought Saddam was a threat too!” quotes pre-date Operation Desert Fox.
Aexia @ 26: “Most observers agree that Saddam’s actual WMD capability ended after Clinton’s airstrikes in 1998. Most of the “Democrats thought Saddam was a threat too!” quotes pre-date Operation Desert Fox.”
Define ‘most oberservers’.
Defense Secretary Cohen, after Desert Fox in 1998: “We’ve degraded Saddam Hussein’s ability to deliver chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. We’ve diminished his ability to wage war against his neighbors.
There is a huge difference between ‘eliminate’ and ‘diminish’. If Saddam’s program had been elminated in 1998, then why did Madeline Albright say in 1999 in response to a question on why the embargo was still needed: “There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It’s just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies.”
If the program had been ‘eliminated’, why were sanctions still necessary?
Al Gore in 2002: “Nevertheless, Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
So you have several very prominent Democrats repeating the WMD threat line after 1998, so again, this laid the foundation for Democratic support for the Iraq war resolution in Congress.
[In Milwaukee Democrats only destroy van tires and then go to court and lie about it!!! Now, Democrat in Colorado,………………………….] Greeley, Colo. (AP) — Republican U.S. Rep. Marilyn Musgrave’s re-election campaign was already heated, and it just got smelly as well: Her staff accused a Democratic activist Thursday of leaving an envelope full of dog feces at Musgrave’s Greeley office.
Musgrave spokeswoman Shaun Kenney said someone stuffed the envelope through the mail slot in the door on May 31 and then sped away in a car. Kenney said most of the preprinted return address was blacked out, but staffers used the nine-digit ZIP code to trace it to Kathleen Ensz, a Weld County Democratic volunteer.
Ensz told The Associated Press she left the envelope at Musgrave’s office but said it “wasn’t in the office doors, it was in the foyer.” Asked what she meant by the act, she declined comment.
Cantwell bloggers
I don’t yet know who I will vote for in November. But it bothers me that the Democratic Party in Wa. State endorsed Cantwell when we haven’t had a primary yet. I knew the Iraq invasion would be a disaster and it bothers me that Cantwell continues to defend her vote on it. I find it difficult to contemplate voting for any more candidates who do not stand for peace. Our country and our world need peace – we need some sanity – to begin healing our psyches, international relationships, environment, and economy. One thing I know for sure is that I won’t be able to motivate myself to work for Cantwell’s campaign. I just can’t support war. I’m tired of being in the position of being made to vote for the lesser of two evils. It is not an adequate choice for me anymore and I’m questioning whether democracy exists in our country at all.
Again Goldy tries to imply that “perennial” (meaning yearly in my dictionary) is somehow a bad word. First, Mark has not run yearly. Secondly, Maria Cantwell has run for office more times than Mark.
Instead of pointing out which of Wilson’s issues he does not agree with, he just resorts to name-calling and pejorative (in his mind) adjectives.
The party (and Goldy) would also like you to stay home on Primary day because Maria is already the “party’s nomineeâ€. And our vote doesn’t count?
That is one of the BIG problems with Maria (and all centrist Democrats like Goldy). Top down politics.
She has made it clear that the grassroots opinion does not count. Your vote is not needed. Your input is not wanted. Just fall in line and be obedient. She is the incumbent and does not need to run on any issues.
Her plan is that the Primary win is already “in the bagâ€. She is depending on MONEY and professional out-of-state campaign managers (even her website was developed out of Los Angeles) and will not be needing any grassroots volunteers. She will not be endorsing the recent Democrat platform either.
So why should we support her? We get one reason – “A Republican win would be worse.” Fear.
Will Maria be much different on these major issues?
If Maria would not censure Bush, why would she be in favor of impeachment? She continues to be pro Iraq war when there was NO WMD, why wouldn’t she vote for the upcoming IRAN WAR who really might have WMD.
She favors outsourcing, H1B visa increases, CAFTA / N|AFTA and a whole host of legislation that are taking jobs and devastating middle class jobs. If she wouldn’t support jobs for American, why should we support her job?
Neither Cantwell (or McGavick) will get my vote because they have not earned it.
When Maria loses this seat with another close recount, don’t blame it on the progressives for abandoning her – she has left us a long time ago.
Sorry not this time around. Reflections of the last election are still too fresh. The Democrats have failed to meet the lowest of expectations. When we say we’re voting them all out, we mean all, especially a Democrat to fearful to renounce her support of the war. If this standard we’re upheld each election, we wouldn’t be in this nightmare. Plant signs in your yard, make endless phone calls, plaster your car with bumber stickers, you’re not changing the republican minds, so change the expectations of the democrats.
I WANT 2 BE A FUCKIN MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1fuck
my dad is tom…..he thinks i should be a man.
fuck ass pussy shit bitch crap damn faggot pissssss beeatch asshole becky
haha grant and his medal. goooooooood times