[Peace-discuss] Obama's choice subverts anti-war candidate in IL

[C. G. Estabrook]

	October 14-15, 2006 [sic]
	How Rahm Emanuel Has Rigged a Pro-War Congress
	By JOHN WALSH

...The position of these Dem candidates is indistinguishable from that of George 
W. Bush. How did this betrayal of the Democratic rank and file come about? Who 
chose these Democratic candidates that oppose rank and file Dems on the number 
one question on voters' minds, the war on Iraq? How could such candidates get 
elected in the primaries? Two primary campaigns, now largely forgotten, give us 
the answer. They are near perfect case studies, and they deserve some reflection 
although the Dem establishment would dearly like us to forget them.

The first case is the Democratic primary race between Christine Cegelis and 
Tammy Duckworth in Illinois's 6th CD, a Republican District, which has elected 
the disgusting Henry Hyde from time immemorial. Then in 2004 Christine Cegelis, 
who is only mildly antiwar (1), ran as the Democrat with a grass roots campaign 
and polled a remarkable 44% against the hideous Hyde in her first run. It was 
not too long before Hyde decided to retire, and the field seemed to be open for 
Cegelis in 2006.

Enter Rahm Emanuel, chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, 
who dug up a pro-war candidate, Tammy Duckworth. Although she had both her legs 
blown off in Iraq, she has remained committed to "staying the course" in Iraq 
(2). Duckworth had no political experience and did not live in the 6th District, 
but Rahm Emanuel raised a million dollars for her and brought in Dem 
heavyweights Joe Lieberman, Barak Obama, John Kerry, John Edwards and Hillary 
Clinton to support her. Despite all this help and with the Cegelis campaign 
virtually penniless, Duckworth barely managed to eke out a victory by a measly 
four percentage points. According to a recent Cook Report, Duckworth is not the 
smashing success that Rahm Emanuel had dreamed of; she remains tied at 41% of 
the vote with her rookie Republican Rival, Peter Roskam, the same percentage 
that Cegelis had against the entrenched Hyde in 2004! Recently (9/30), Duckworth 
was pushed onto the national scene to help her campaign, providing the 
"rebuttal" to Bush's weekly Saturday radio address. AP, in its story on the 
exchange where Duckworth was supposed to differ with W on Iraq, concluded thus: 
"She offered no proposal for an immediate withdrawal or a timetable for withdrawal."

...even though Duckworth has been the recipient of Rahm's largesse, to the tune 
of $1.8 million, the same amount as her Republican opponent, her campaign has 
not taken wing. You get the picture. If you toe the line for Rahm on the war, 
the money rains on you like manna from heaven and you are elevated to national 
celebrity status. But if you are anti-war, Rahm cuts you off at the wallet.

Note that in each of these two cases Emanuel did not pick candidates based on a 
proven ability to raise money. Nor did he pick them for their ability to win. In 
Duckworth's case she damned near lost despite the cash infusion, and McNirney 
did win despite the money that Emanuel funneled to his opponent. Emanuel is not 
choosing proven fundraisers or winning candidates; he is choosing pro-war 
candidates...

Notes

(1.) Cegelis was against the war on Iraq but only in a very timid way. She 
opposed it before it started, but it was only 4th out of 6 issues on her web 
site, and she was not for immediate withdrawal. Here is what she said on her web 
site at the time of the primary. "I have opposed this war from the start. But 
revisiting what brought us to this disastrous point does not solve the problem. 
It is time for us to bring our troops home. The Bush Administration must provide 
a comprehensive timetable for withdrawal of the majority of our combat troops at 
the earliest possible date. " Notice she does not say "Out Now," like Murtha or 
Lamont. She leaves it all up to Bush to set a timetable, which is the standard 
copout for pro-war Dems. Although good enough for PDA (!), it was too much for 
Rahm Emanuel and company.

(2.) Duckworth says of Iraq on her web site: "The fact is we are in Iraq now and 
we can't simply pull up stakes and create a security vacuum. It wouldn't be in 
our national interest to leave Iraq in chaos and risk allowing a country with 
unlimited oil wealth to become a base for terrorists." Not even a mention of a 
timetable.


	###