[Terry] MORAN: Senator Webb, you're a Vietnam veteran, won a Navy Cross there, and have made no secret over the years that you feel that America betrayed the Vietnamese people and abandoned them to a cruel fate. Isn't that what the president is saying here will happen to the Iraqis if we withdraw?WEBB: Well, I think I may be one of the few people in government who still on the one hand strongly believes in what we attempted to do in Vietnam, and on the other hand, from the beginning, strongly warned against the strategic blunder of going into Iraq.
They simply are not comparable. If you look at even the opinions of the American people, despite the way that the Vietnam War ended, eight years after the Gulf of Tonkin, in 1972, the American people, by a margin of 74 to 11 percent, still believed that it was important that South Vietnam not fall to communism. The overall strategic objective was strong; the implementation became flawed.
In Iraq, we're having a reverse situation. We have an overall strategic objective that was not directly related to what we were attempting to do in the war against international terrorism. We have good people implementing a bad strategy. It's just not the same situation. And in terms of the aftermath?
MORAN: Not that we're there?
WEBB: In terms of the aftermath, no one in a responsible position in government is saying that we should pull the plug in Iraq and have a precipitous withdrawal. What we're trying to do is to say, eventually we have to withdraw from Iraq, we have to draw down our troops. Even the military realities of the surge, which have upswung the cycles of deployment, are going to mandate that we reduce our troops, and eventually leave.
We're not going to have stability in that region until the American troops are out of Iraq. We have to do it in a way that brings in the other countries around the region, allows us to focus on international terrorism, and does not destabilize the region. But it must be done.
If you look at [Virginia Sen.] Jim Webb's response to the State of the Union address this year, Democrats should watch the tape of that over and over and over until they get it in their minds that here is a guy who is as centrist as you can get, I'm not sure that he's even left of center, but what grabs people in the center about him is that he knows how to throw a punch. He can do it with conviction. When he speaks about national security he can take what is thought of as a left-wing position, which is the most stridently antiwar position anyone really is taking ... and enunciate that position with crystal-clear clarity as a values issue: that families like his are willing to sacrifice their lives for the country, but that the flip side of that contract is that their leaders have to be judicious in the ways they call for them to sacrifice. Sending them to the desert in the wrong war into the midst of somebody else's civil war is not judicious and is betraying the military and is as far from supporting the troops as you can get.
I'm not sure that Webb's a "centrist" particularly - Webb himself says that the "old labels" of liberal, conservative, etc. no longer apply. Besides that, though, I strongly agree with this analysis. Why is Rudy Giuliani popular among Republicans? Because he is perceived as tough (whether he really IS tough is another question), not because of his positions on abortion or gay rights. The Democratic nominee also has to be perceived as tough, then beat the Republican nominee on other characteristics and issues.
It was John Kerry who really moved me to vote for Webb in the primary, I was on the fence but a few words from a damn fine Democrat who I tust helped me decide, and I know I am not the only one that was moved to Webb because of Kerry's stand with him.
I think John Kerry learned a lot and I would say his biggest mistake of all was listening to Bill Clinton, who by the way may have won 2 elections but by no means a majority and IMO helped in this "centrist" mentality which has furthered many things that are wrong for this country and Democrats.
You simply can't compare the Webb and Kerry campaigns, as Webb was never "swiftboated" (I'm not going to count that pathetic attack by the Allen campaign on his novels which were fictional), the term I mean in the literal sense of attacking a veteran's war record with lies. The reason? Kerry protested the war, and Webb didn't. People mad at Kerry for doing what he felt was right decided to get revenge, and GOP operatives were waiting to use them with millions of dollars to spend on a smear campaign. You are correct that he should have responded sooner, but I'm sorry -- everybody (except the wingnut extremists) knows it was a pack of lies and knew it by September. It was not until after the election and Paul Begala spoke out on this, that the meme was created that Kerry lost the election because he "didn't fight back". He did fight back, and not only that, he was handicapped by Terry MacAuliffe's DNC (as in the same Terry MacAuliffe who is part of the Clinton campaign today), who made the Dem convention a good 5 weeks before the RNC, and Kerry had no money to spend during that long, hot August.
I find that article simplistic, and yes -- it does bash Kerry for the point of doing some false contrast between Webb and Kerry which is inappropriate. Bush, although a terrible president, was an able campaigner and did not make the horrendous errors Allen made in '06. Even with that, it was a very, very close election that I am thrilled Webb won.
Anyway, I think we must agree to disagree on this one. I just wanted to offer an alternative view.
Democrats yesterday said Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign is off track and blamed television ads by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, President Bush's bounce from the Republican convention, and themselves."Mistakes were made," James Carville, Democratic strategist, said of the campaign's August operations.
Mr. Kerry "is not satisfied with the state of his campaign" and will retool it this week, Mr. Carville told NBC's "Meet the Press."
"It's true," Kerry strategist Tad Devine told "Fox News Sunday." "Our message could not get through the way we wanted it to in August," because of the Swift Boat ads.
Source: Washington Times
On the other hand, I definitely do believe that the Kerry campaign performed much better after the staff shakeup.
On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.
So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.
So what happened?
James Carville gets on the phone with his wife, Mary Matalin, who is at the White House with Bush.
"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'
"Matalin went to Cheney to report...You better tell the President Cheney told her."
Matalin does, advising Bush that "somebody in authority needed to get in touch with J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican Secretary of State in Ohio who would be in charge of any challenge to the provisional votes." An SOS goes out to Blackwell.
I don't trust Carville further than I can throw him. I remember the scene you were talking about -- it is from Election 2004 by the Newsweek writers, which, let's face it, was a major hit piece on the Kerry campaign.
It's not for nothing that Dems have a reputation for not wanting to soil their hands with a fight. Dems need to stop apologizing for wanting the government to be run by people who actually believe in the government's mission and they need to stop letting the other side impugn their patriotism and their dedication to this country.
The closest you can come to pinning down on the failed and imaginary political spectrum is to say that Webb's a MODERATE. But even that doesn't work. The real way to describe Webb is to say that he's A PROUD POPULIST DEMOCRAT AND VERY MUCH HIS OWN MAN.
Foremost Webb is his own man. He will challenge authority (when it's stupid) and yet demand accountability using the same system (our political / government) which has strayed from liberty and been corrupted ... to use that same system to police the problem.
Webb made up his mind about Vietnam a long time ago and the tragedy it was is set against the backdrop of FAILED LEADERSHIP ... on a massive scale at the government level. This failure called Vietnam was mostly with a Democratic regime.... on McNamara's watch. Because it was a Democratic Party failure.... Well that is about the only reason that Dubya even raised it in a speech. To remind America on a subliminal level that Democrats don't do National Security very well. Hence they must be WRONG about their policies toward the IRAQ WAR.
Quite a bold analogy by the artful dodger ... er Decider.
So here we go again America, only this time it's with IRAQ and a Failed President. How F(*^$cking Stupid! .... Dubya ..... and How criminal is it to have such STUPID leadership at the presidential level??
Democrats, Republicans and Independents and all patriots .... they NEED TO DEMAND MORE!!! of their representatives ..... and Webb delivers, let's keep his message GOING!
Hammer away Mr. Webb ... you'll never be wrong when you present Reasoned Arguments. .... the profound basis of our Democracy.
Cheers!!