President Bush vetoes the Iraq funding bill, which sets a timetable to get the heck out of dodge, and no one issues a big statement? Or has a press conference? And if any of you did, it sure isn't an effect PR machine.
Isn't anyone trying to win an election here? With the country up in arms over Iraq - and with a seat to replace a congressmen who is a leader in the fight to get out of Iraq and on other military issues - I'd think at least one of the candidates would come out with a big statement on the issue. I guess that would be too easy...
Posts
4 comments:
As we were chatting last night, these guys claim to be running, but only Eldridge seems sincere about it. I know, I know that technically there isn't even a vacant seat yet, but they have all announced.
Is Nicki overly cautious or does she figure she has an early lead and wants to sit on it?
Those are some of the blandest, least specific websites ever. Then, as you say, they all (the Repubican isn't saying yet) are anti-Iraq War according to their forum. What kind of leader won't say what she stands for on big issues and bigger news?
Wake up, people!
We're going to elect a whole plethora of anti-war candidates....that have no other platform to stand on. While I share a lot of anti-war sentiment, I would feel irresponsible to elect someone who has no plans once we're out of Iraq.
joe's generalization is dramatic, but unsupported. In this race, for example, the strongly anti-war candidates have fully developed and relatively broad platforms (except for Finegold, who hasn't revealed much so far).
How those play in the relatively conservative 5th is more the question.
Post a Comment