John Warner Day Four

Sen. Warner skipped a day of making news yesterday, but it was worth it. Today, he made another step forward in saying for the first time he'd consider supporting Congressionally mandated timetables for withdrawing our troops from Iraq, if President Bush doesn't initiate such a move himself. Just three days ago, Warner explicitly said he'd vote against such proposals. While I still think Warner could and should make a personal plea to Rep. Tom Davis to join Warner, Warner's shown sufficient leadership thus far to drag along some fellow Republican Senators.

[I based this post on an AP report, but that report didn't attribute any of Warner's remarks today to any forum other than Meet the Press. I just watched Meet the Press for myself. Warner was pressed pretty hard by Tim Russert to answer the hypothetical of what Warner would do if Bush's spokespeople testify on Sept. 15 and don't promise actual withdrawals of troops. Warner only would say that he wouldn't want it to see Bush veto a bill presented to Bush by Congress. It's possible that Warner was saying he wouldn't vote for a withdrawal proposal unless there were at least 66 other Senators who would also vote for it. Thus far, there haven't even been 60 Senators supporting timetables. If we get to 66 not counting Warner any time soon, I can't imagine Bush wouldn't jump in front of that parade, but, then again, I was one of the few idiots who thought that Bush wouldn't actually invade Iraq in the first place even on the eve of his doing it.]

John Warner Day Two

It ain't much, but I'll take it. The AP reports that the White House asked Warner to clarify his remarks yesterday to say that he hasn't broken with Bush. Warner refused. While I think Warner's snubbing of Bush may help embolden other Republicans to do the same, I'm still hoping for something more concrete. Here's a link to the AP story - http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/bw-cong/2007/aug/24/082404322.html

coulda been worse

Unfortunately, I had to go to work and missed Tom Davis's appearance yesterday. The Washington Post has done a pretty good job of covering it, complete with video excerpts - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/23/AR2007082302011.html?hpid=topnews. It looks like no one took me up on my suggestion that Davis be asked about his constituents punishing his wife if Davis continues to support this horrible war. Remember we still have the power. If you live in Jeannemarie's district and you regret voting for Tom last November, please consider voting for Chap this November.

Please Tell Tom Davis How You Feel on the War.

Tom Davis has agreed to confront us and answer our questions on the war. The details are at the bottom of this post.

Davis has been increasingly at odds with his constituents on this. He has abdicated any sense of constitutionality, leadership, and morality in letting Bush do whatever he wants. It is imperative that Tom Davis know that though we feel abandoned by him, we are not disheartened. More importantly, many of us are especially empowered right now. Thanks to his personal life and VA's political calendar and map, those of us who live both in Tom Davis' district and his wife's district can tell Tom that if he doesn't immediately start voting the right way on the war, this November, Jeannemarie will be the first to experience the consequences. Of course, the Davises have already written off my vote, but I strongly urge those of you who are independent and Republicans to acknowledge how some things are above politics, and, as I've stated before, if Jeannemarie loses this November, Tom Davis' own political future will have suffered a major, probably fatal, blow.

Major thanks to Americans Against the Escalation in Iraq for organizing this forum. The group is soliciting questions to ask Davis. E-mail them to virginia4@iraqsummer.org. Thanks also to Alice Marshall at gotv.blogspot.com for the tip.

I encourage those who can make it on Thursday afternoon in Burke to join in this important opportunity to show Tom Davis (and Jeannemarie) exactly where the people whom they represent stand on the war. If you can't make it, please send your questions and remarks to the e-mail address above.

Accotink Unitarian Universalist Church
10125 Lakehaven Court, Burke
Thursday, August 23 2-3pm

Our Community and the National Blogosphere

Just a quick note to let you know that the two-fer I've been blogging about, getting both John Warner's and Tom Davis' seats into the Dem column next year, was mentioned in the latest posting at http://www.downwithtyranny.blogspot.com. Maybe if people go there and find this site, we can get the big moneyed, many eyeballed, national blogosphere to realize that by grabbing Jeannemarie's seat this year, we can make it a three-fer.

Do we have more to fear than fear itself?

I was looking through the list of Senate Democrats who voted for the surveillance reform bill yesterday. Sixty votes were needed, and 60 votes were obtained. To get to 60, some usually reliably anti-Bush Democratic Senators voted to give Bush everything he wanted for another six months. Among these surprising Bush supporters were Carper of Delaware, Mikulski of Maryland, and our own Jim Webb. Prior to the Democratic cave-in, Sen. Lott had explicitly warned of an imminent terrorist attack and claimed that voting with Bush was necessary to try to prevent the attack. Lott even advised residents to leave town until Sept. 12, the day after the sixth anniversary of the attacks of 9/11/01. Of all the Dems needed to get to 60, is it possible Carper, Mikulski, and Webb signed on, because their own constituents would likely be affected by any such attack? Why Mikulski and not Cardin? Is it because Mikulski's term is up before Cardin's? [Biden still hopes to be nominated, and obviously Warner voted with Bush.] It sure seems like important information about our safety is being kept from us. I hate not knowing whether I'm being paranoid or whether the most rational explanation is that the information is so bad and so imminent that the costs of publishing in terms of panic and damage to our political institutions outweighs the damage of the attack itself.