Webb is...

*For rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the richest Americans at a time of war
*For getting out of Iraq
*Pro-choice (Roe v. Wade)
*For 2nd Amendment
*For civil unions
*Against the Virginia "marriage amendment"
*For "don't ask don't tell"
*Against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
*For a windfall profits tax on oil companies
*For a 5% income tax credit for veterans
*Against "outsourcing" of American jobs
*Against excessive "earmarks"
*Against the degree of lobbyist influence today
*For solar and nuclear power
*For "a panel of highly qualified, politically neutral individuals who possess the right security clearances to take a clear look at" the NSA data collection issue.
*For reining in the power of the executive branch and restoring "checks and balance" in our system
*For Affirmative Action for African Americans
*Against excluding poor whites from diversity programs
*For DC representation in the House of Representatives

As far as Webb voting for George W. Bush in 2000, I would point out that Webb voted for John Kerry in 2004.  I would also point out that Webb has a unique ability to draw "Reagan Democrats" back into the Democratic Party.  Perhaps that's why so many Republicans are afraid of Webb?

Cheers,

1. You served in the Reagan Administration and were a Republican for many years.  What are the main reasons you decided to switch to the Democratic Party?
I've never run for office.  That tends to clarify the mind.  I identified myself most strongly with the Democratic Party until the end of the Vietnam War, then I went with the Republican Party on issues of national security.  I was not affiliated in any way with either of the Bush Administrations.  Events following 9/11, plus a lot of thought while I was writing Born Fighting, led me to decide that I best identify with the Democratic Party.  That being said, I have friends in both parties, and if I am elected I hope we can restore a measure of civility in the Congress that is now sorely lacking.

2. Which wing, if any, of the Democratic Party do you feel most comfortable with?  Would you describe yourself as a liberal, moderate, conservative, populist, or progressive Democrat?  Or something else entirely?
I would describe myself as conservative on national defense, populist on economic issues, and a social moderate.

3. Why did you decide to run for U.S. Senate from Virginia?  Is your run fueled by any degree of anger towards the Bush Administration and "culture of corruption" Republican Congress?
People who are looking for anger from me will be disappointed.  I was angry for many years following Vietnam because by virtue of my writings and government jobs I had inherited the responsibility of defending the wrongs done to those who had served in that war.  But I lost that anger after 9/11.  There are too many important issues to focus on, here in the present. 

To be sure, this Administration has been woefully inept in many areas, and the political culture in Washington has become corrupted due to a Congress that has lost its way.  I will focus on those areas, but more as leadership challenges than as the result of personal anger.

4. What differentiates you, if anything, from other politicians in America today?
The major difference between me and most of them is that I am not a career politician and have never desired to be one.  I have strong experience as a committee counsel in the Congress and as a Defense Department leader.  But I have been extremely fortunate to be able to support myself and my family through a writing career that has given me independence and also insights that I would never have obtained if I had been running for office continuously.  Writing also allows one a measure of introspection that is rarely available in government.

5. What are your main criticisms of George Allen, who you would be running against if you win the Democratic nomination?  What is your main argument for replacing George Allen, and why do you believe you have the best chance to defeat him this year?
If you like George W. Bush then you should love George Allen, who has supported this president 96 percent of the time

6. You were an early opponent of invading Iraq -- speaking out on the issue in September 2002.  What were your reasons for caution on Iraq?
Actually I spoke out on this before September 2002, although the Washington Post article I wrote in that month was one of the first major pieces warning that the real issue was not WMD's, but impending terrorism and the lack of an exit strategy.  It has been my strong position for many years that the US should not become an occupying power in that part of the world, with its constant, multi-polar turmoil.

7. Given that we're in Iraq now, what would be the essential elements of a sound strategy to extricate ourselves?
We need to get out of Iraq, but we need to leave in a more responsible way than when we entered.  This does not mean that we should be there for a long period of time. We must pressure this Administration to say, unequivocally, that the US has no long term aspirations for occupying Iraq.  We should consult with the other countries in the region and bring them into the process - after all, they are going to be very much in the process once we leave. 

8. Aside from the specific situation in Iraq, what would you say is your overall view on when it is appropriate to use U.S. military force?  What sorts of situations demand U.S. intervention, and what don't?
The only time it is appropriate to use U.S. military force is when inaction poses a direct threat to the United States or our interests. 

I believe people in this country need to look very closely at the language this Administration has been using recently, on when it would be appropriate to use force. Last week they renewed their supposed doctrine of "pre-emptive war."  Pre-emptive war is a far different thing than a pre-emptive attack on, say, a terrorist cell that is preparing to attack us.  Iraq was a pre-emptive war - taking over a country by force when it was not threatening us.  This is not the way the United States should be exporting its values.

9. You've spoken of the distinction between "free trade" and "fair trade."  What sort of policy initiatives would you like the see the U.S. pursue in order to promote fair trade?
I'm not an economist, but I'm a frequent traveler, especially in Asia, and I did bring American businesses into Vietnam for more than two years.  This gives me an appreciation of how some of these imbalances occur.  In my view, free trade only exists when two countries that have comparative economic and governmental systems are involved - as, for the most part, we can see in our practices with western Europe.  For the rest of it, adjustments should be made, unless there are other trade-offs (forgive the pun) that occur elsewhere in a relationship.  We are in a situation where workers are losing jobs because of unfair trade practices from foreign governments, and we cannot and should not allow these practices to continue.  The first place I would look would be the protections available to our industries in our existing trade laws.  We should make it clear to foreign governments that we will not allow them to operate outside of established international trade law to gain an advantage over U.S. companies.  Beyond that, I believe it would be fair to re-examine NAFTA and other acts to try and rebalance the playing field.

10. What ideas do you have regarding social security and medicare? Given the Republicans unpopular attempt to convince people to support privitization of Social Security will you go after your opponent on that issue?
I don't agree with this concept.  I worked for four years on the Veterans Affairs committee in the US House of Representatives.  Much of this work related to disability compensation and pension programs.  Pension programs are designed to guarantee a "floor" for a standard of living.  Social Security was also designed as a "floor" so that people who worked all of their lives and had little or no private-sector retirement income could count on protecting their basic needs.  It doesn't make sense to "bet" this "floor" on the stock market or other such speculative programs.

11.  You wrote an article where you said, “In fact, the greatest realignment in modern politics would take place rather quickly if the right national leader found a way to bring the Scots-Irish and African Americans to the same table, and so to redefine a formula that has consciously set them apart for the past two centuries.”  I am wondering if you have a plan or a vision as to how such a coming together could happen?
The story of the South has never been simply white vs. black.  It has always been a small veneer of well-off whites, manipulating white against blacks.  As I write in Born Fighting, only 5 percent of the whites in the South actually owned slaves at the height of slavery, and by 1936, of the 1.8 million share-croppers in the South, 71 percent were white. 

I learned from the conduct of my grandfather, who stood up to this system in East Arkansas (from the bottom, looking up), that the two cultures which began in the South (and are now widely scattered) have far more in common, in their historical journey, than almost any other two cultures.  If you look at Virginia, the rural whites along the mountains and in southside Virginia are similarly-situated in economic terms with urban blacks.  We need to stop fussing with each other and realize that we have common goals. 
This will be one of my strongest priorities if I am elected to the Senate.

12. What do you think the US should do about Iran?
The greatest successes we've had over the past six decades have been the result of firmness, patience, sticking to our national values but working with other countries to define and control serious threats.  That was exactly how we won the Cold War: demonstrating that we had military resolve, but more importantly, demonstrating that we believed in ideals, and that we had allies who agreed with those ideals.  You cannot export values at the point of a gun -- this is what the Soviet Union was attempting to do.

Iran is an emerging power.  I warned in 1990 that the greatest danger if we invaded Iraq after Kuwait would be the empowerment of Iran.  I warned again after the 9/11 attacks that Iran -- and its relationship with China -- was the greatest long-term threat in that region.

Right now it is important that we face the situation in Iran with firmness, but with the participation of other countries and without irresponsible threats that simply "up the ante" and invite counter-threats.  We need to make it clear to China and Russia that their relationships with us hinge on their responsible support re: Iran and its nuclear ambitions.

If we simply attacked Iran right now, we would face the reality that there are 135,000 Americans sitting in Iraq who could absorb a counter-blow.  Iran also could shut down the Straits of Hormuz very quickly, which would have serious impact, especially on Japan.

Common sense.  Multilateral negotiations.  Firmness but not stupidity or false bravado. 

13.  What do you think about “outsourcing” of American jobs?
“I have very strong feelings about that.”  The United States is “starting to look like the Philippines," and "outsourcing is a big part of that…there's got to be a formula that protects American workers."

14.  Comments on your opponent, Harris Miller?
“Harris Miller is running a very traditional campaign,” which is all about “party endorsements and fealty to party structure."  In contrast, “I am trying to demonstrate that I can bring people back to the Democratic Party."

15.  What about earmarks and lobbying reform?
  “Congress is in total disarray" today, with an "incredible increase in the number of lobbyists" and the “incessant need to raise money.”  The bottom line, in Webb's view, is that "the system is going to break" if it's not fixed, adding "I really don't like earmarks."

16. What was your position [on women in the military]?
"When I was secretary of the Navy, I opened up more billets to women than any secretary of the Navy in history. But we did it the right way. I got my warfare chiefs, the three warfare chiefs, to go down and examine inside their own specialties where women should be absorbed. I had them then report to the chief of naval operations. And then the chief of naval operations reported to me. I had the uniform side make the decisions, the recommendations, and then bring them to me. This wasn't me standing up there pontificating because I was a civilian official. So when this has been done in a rational way where it works, I fully support it. When it's an intrusion from the outside, I think that not only I but other people should have questions. So where it is now? I think that from what I can see from a distance it's working well."

17. How can we reduce our dependency on imported oil?
Webb supports investing in "alternative energy sources, particularly solar power."  Also, Webb supports "properly constructed nuclear power as they've got in Japan." Webb opposes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

18. What makes a leader?
"People look for affirmative leaders," not just "vague optimism."  "People don't just want [their leaders] to say everything is wrong," but instead want "real, strong leadership that's affirmative."  In contrast, "ultra-conservatives talk about God, guns, gays, abortion and the flag to get everybody riled up" instead of "sitting down and saying, this is where it's broke and this is what we can do [to fix it]."

19. Would you have supported Senator Russ Feingold in his call to censure President Bush?
"I have a great respect for Senator Feingold.  I view him as one of the few people in the Senate who are focusing on issues that are debilitating to the process of government (campaign finance, e.g.).  I'm not sure I would support a censure over the NSA surveillance issue, but I do believe that people need to keep connecting the dots on the widespread abuse of power in this Presidency.  Too many people in the Congress want to "kiss that issue" as it goes by.  I do not understand what it is that the Administration wishes to conceal in the NSA issue, because it was a simple matter for them to file the appropriate notice at the time. 
I'm not saying that I would not support a censure.  This is a new proposal and one of my reservations would be that it is aimed at only one element of Presidential abuse."

20. Comments on health care, education, and income inequality in America?
"...the reasons that finally compelled me to run for the Senate came from the worry that I have about a growing unfairness in our society. 

The country is breaking into three different groups, and is becoming defined by class far more than at any time in my memory.  The people at the top have never had it so good.  You only have to look at the ratios of corporate executive compensation compared to the average factory worker to see this. 

The middle class is stagnating.  Jobs are being sent overseas, public education is spotty.  Health care is being denied to many people who actually do have jobs -- it's not a 'welfare' problem.

And we are in danger of developing a permanent underclass, without true hope of advancement."

21. The deadline to sign up for Medicare Part D, federally subsidized prescription drug coverage is May 15.  After that,  seniors will incur a 1 percent penalty per month on their premiums.  Reportedly, millions of seniors are still weighing the decision.  What is your opinion of this situation?
Part D is a complicated program for any person. It's a step in the right direction, but seniors need more time to figure out what joining the program means. I support the Democratic effort to extend the deadline, because seniors should not be penalized for sorting through the complexities.

22. What do you think is the cause of high oil prices? What can be done to alleviate the situation?
While increased global demand from places like China and India have had some effect on the price of oil, these changes are not drastic enough to explain why the price of a barrel of oil has tripled since 2001. After 9/11 but before the War in Iraq, the price of oil was still $24 per barrel. It is only since we invaded Iraq that the price of oil has become historically high. The instability our government created in the Middle East by occupying Iraq has unquestionably had a large effect on our gas prices.

Oil companies have taken advantage of this instability, continually reporting new record profits. It is unacceptable for our government to continue to offer tax breaks to these oil companies while they profit off of the War in Iraq. As a Senator, I will stand against the oil profiteering and fight for windfall tax on oil companies. 

23. Can you register your opinion about the tax plan that is nearing approval in Congress, the one that will give millionaires an average of $41,000 in tax cuts every year and the one that will give middle class families under $100?
I have a number of reservations about the current tax reconciliation bill.  I'm told that it takes out extensions of tax credits for middle class families, and that a $5 billion tax break for big oil was put back in, after being eliminated in an earlier bill.  I would oppose those.
I would also favor some sort of windfall tax on oil company profits.  I do not believe this would be "inappropriate government behavior," as these profits -- upwards of $80 billion in the last year -- took place because of world-wide conditions and not because of any larger effort or innovation by oil companies.

24. What [is] your position is on using offshore outsourcing for private DoD government contracts?
As someone who is extremely concerned about the impact of outsourcing on our workers, I would oppose these kinds of contracts.  In my view there is clear precedent to oppose them -- as when DOD was required to buy American-made vehicles, etc.

25. Today we got to read in the paper how Americans phone conversations are being recorded and given to the government. I would like to know at this point if you would support censuring the President as Feingold as introduced in a resolution(I know your earlier view was that it was too soon)? I am also interested in hearing if you would be willing to talk to Harry Reid and some of the other moderate Democrats that support your candidacy about this issue?
I believe the time has come for a panel of highly qualified, politically neutral individuals who possess the right security clearances to take a clear look at this issue.  There are too many seeming irregularities for this or any other Congress to sit still and do nothing. 

I would favor a panel at this point because it could operate relatively quickly, and would possess the expertise to evaluate the information.  This would not be a '9/11 Commission," but rather a small group of experts who could go in, ask the right questions, and evaluate the facts.  They should be looking at who, exactly, has been listened to, and what, exactly, is being done to the data base.  They should also report as to what, exactly, President Bush means when he says that no actions were taken without court approval.

The difficulty of a censure movement at this point, or of impeachment, is that it would tie up the Congress and keep it from doing its daily business.  One of the strongest arguments now being made against voting for Democrats in 06 is that a Democratic Congress would slow the country down by engaging in lengthy retaliations. 

The NSA issue is serious -- and fair -- game for congressional action, but let's try to get some specific facts.  Of course, if they won't cooperate in providing the facts, that's a different story.

26. What are the forms of corporate welfare are you most focused on attacking in the Senate?
I believe that the internationalization of our economy, plus out-sourcing, has caused a situation where the health of the financial sector no longer is an indication of the health of the economy.  Along with this, such things as Corporate CEO compensation packages are totally out of control, and often are based on how badly the average worker has been ripped off. 

I saw a set of charts about a week ago which show a startling reality.  The first chart showed "after-tax corporate profits" as a percentage of our GDP, which are at an all-time historic high.  The second showed wages and salaries as a percentage of GDP, which are at an all-time low.  And in the middle, as we all know, are the good jobs that have gone overseas. 

We must try to correct this very dangerous bifurcation in our society.

27.  Wiretapping, checks and balances, etc.
The danger of the abuse of centralized power is an historical constant.  Americans should indeed worry about a centralized government that has the power to listen in and monitor the conduct of average citizens, as well as the power to listen in and monitor the conduct of their political opposition.  Those powers (and that conduct) are a staple of authoritarian and totalitarian societies.  I'll never forget my visit 10 years ago to the defunct HQ of STASI in East Germany, which had kept informant files on millions of East Germans. 

I am not making any allegations against this Administration.  What I am saying is that the Constitution deliberately built in checks and balances among the three branches of government in order to prevent such conduct.  If the executive branch is not sharing the information it has collected from NSA wire taps, what gives it the authority to keep it to itself, and why is it so skittish? 

28. BRAC Commission’s decision to close the Oceana Naval Air Station in Virginia Beach
“This facility belongs in Virginia,” said Webb, a former U.S. Secretary of the Navy.  “As a U.S. Senator, I will not allow political considerations to play a role in decisions that negatively impact the military’s presence in Virginia.”  “I am confident that Commonwealth and area officials made every effort to effectively resolve any concerns involving encroachment put forth by the Commission,” said Webb. 
“I can not help but to ask if political favoritism played a role in this decision.”

29. Net Neutrality
Webb said that he's not very familiar with this subject, but that he definitely believes the internet and blogs represent democracy in action and must be protected.

Additionally, I cannot believe that anyone would have the gall to say that just bc someone voted for Bush-a someone who DID NOT support the Iraq war, Bush's worst mistake-is a bad candidate for Senator.  I mind much more that someone may have voted for Al Gore or John Kerry, but thought that going to war in Iraq was a good idea, which HARRIS MILLER DID.

As for the endorsements, well, sour grapes, my friend, sour grapes.  Harris Miller certainly hasn't said, "Oh, you know what?  I have these other 30 endorsements in my back pocket, but I don't feel that I should tell anyone about them, they just aren't that important."  Yeah, sure......that'll happen.

You say that the outsourcing is the result of Virginia's "lack of available engineers."  I can only assume that you mean to say that the engineers in Virginia that ARE available to work (since their jobs have been otsourced) are unqualified.  I find that hard to believe, sir.  And again, I do hope that Harris Miller would have the guts to let these people working at a diner know that had they only been better at their job, they would still have one.  I am positive that they will vote for Harris Miller then, how about you?

Oh, and yeah; we all get it that more people in this country are so out of touch with American politics that they choose to watch American Idol instead.  Please, peruse through this blog, find one comment or diary from someone claiming that they cannot make it to a political function bc American Idol is on that night.  Good luck with that.

I hope that you take a look at all of the positive diaries on this site, and when you do, you will see that we actually have a lot more to do that does not include attacking Harris Miller.  Our volunteer efforts are going VERY WELL, and we are very proud to work for him.

Thanks for stopping by, Mr. Plotkin.  And good luck.

Jaime

Just because people don't come to the same conclusion that you come to doesn't mean they're "Smearing Harris Miller".

Actually, it's the other way around.  Young people didn't want to get into engineering because they knew that their jobs were given away to cheap foreign labor.  Miller has been a part of this worker replacement movement since the mid 1980's.  Do your research, and you'll find out.  He is not a good Democrat.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if we found out that he voted for Bush twice.  When Sen. John Kerry ran for President, he found problems with these non-immigrant visa programs, because they eroded the middle class.  Bush did not.  And since Miller had a habit of supporting Republicans who were going to make him rich (like Spencer Abraham), maybe he voted for Bush... twice!!

If Harris Miller will shut down his attack machine, then perhaps Loweel and the rest of the gang at RK might be persuaded.

Harris Miller threw the first, second, third and fourth punches.  The first time I ever saw Jim Webb say something negative about Harris Miller was during last Friday's debate. Since then, Webb has gone back to focusing on his message while Miller continues leaving misleading attack robo-call messages on peoples' answering machines. 

Get your story straight Mike: this campaign has gone negative because Harris Miller insisted that it go there.

FYI, Raising Kaine is a PAC and is not authorized by any candidate, see disclaimer below:

"Disclaimer
RaisingKaine.com is not authorized by any candidate.
Paid for and Authorized by Raising Kaine PAC."
 

You can hear it scream apparently...CRAZY...

;)

Dude, it's the deception.
It's the hypocrisy.
It's the lies.
Take a deep breath and read the history of Mister Miller and that is what you will find.

&

http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/2006/04/harris_millers__1.html#comments

We've got to get over it.

The #1 goal of all good and decent Virginians should be to STOP ALLEN. This doofus wants to be president of the United States and, given the lamentable state of the electorate, it could very well happen. This isn't just about our commonwealth; it's about America. It is our duty to save this nation from a possible Allen presidency.

Webb is the best shot we have of taking out Allen, or at least weakening him. Miller will only make him stronger and increase his war chest. You know, I know, Plotkin knows, Sabato knows it, everybody knows it. Webb is the only one who can do it, and even then, it's going to be a long, tough race.

I don't believe that if Webb gets elected he will one day wake up and say, "hey! I want to be a Republican Senator!" He just not the type. This was a long and difficult journey for him, God bless him, and he is not a frivolous man. He's already 60 years old. This epiphany took him more than 20 years. How many politcal epiphanies could he have left, if there were really any coming?

Now, maybe you are concerned that he won't always vote with the leadership. When I remember the Iraq War Resolution vote, I think this could be a good thing. And however he votes, he'd still have a (D) after his name. He'd still contribute to making Reid the Majority Leader over Frist. Which would be a very good thing. And even if he, God forbid, were to turn into a Zell Miller type, know what? Allen would still be gone. Over and out. Back to the "real Virginia" he's always talking about. I'll rent a truck and help him move.

It's time for Virginia to come home to the Democratic Party. Warner and Kaine and others have started leading the exodus back to us. Webb can help lead them back, too. And defeat the doofus Allen at the same time! All good, my friends, all good.

Webb has returned to the Democratic party because of his beliefs, not in spite of them, in this way he is the bellwether of millions of "Reagan Democrats" who have recognized their betrayal by the modern republican party.

One other point I would like to see made more often in regard to Webb's endorsement of Allen in 2000. Webb has acknowledged that he realized that this had been a mistake in 2002 and he is trying to correct the results by replacing Allen as Senator. ALL humans make mistakes but only the enlightened recognize and correct them, how much better off would we be if the current "leadership" was able to admit and correct mistakes? This quality (perhaps above others) is what is desperately needed today.

If you read about Webb's views and actions, you will see he belongs in the (D) column.  The difference between him and Miller is that he saw that he belonged in a new party and had the courage to act on it.  It is not an easy task, not one to be taken lightly.  That he did it shows great deliberation and conviction and true confidence in that new path. 

Jim Webb is welcome back.  The Party of Inclusion should do no less.  In fact I welcome any disaffected Republicans who believe their views are better represented by the Democrats to come over.  We will leave the light on for you and a hot bowl of soup on the warmer.  "Come in from the cold."

  (Zell Miller saw that he should be in the GOP, but instead lacked the courage to come out of his GOP closet.  Instead he stayed a democrat, stewing and festering until he back-stabbed his entire party at the GOP presidential rally in 2004.

How dare you?  You are insulting, and I am offended by your choice for a handle-you are NO THOMAS PAINE.

That seems awfully unfair of you.  Besides, I have yet to see much proof that Miller is much of a Democrat.  He calls himself one, but all the while he donated to Republicans, and even bragged that he thought Bush's idiotic tax policy is a "great idea."

i am 27.

And please don't talk about my panties, I don't even know you.

And how do you even know I am wearing any?

I just think my panties are my business, crotchless or not.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!