No Iraq deadline. No problem

The party of national security
“Democrats are, unfortunately, still allowing Republicans to define what it means to be secure and strong as a nation,” Winograd said Tuesday. “Rather than saying, ‘Look, your policies of pre-emptive war, occupation, and disengagement from diplomacy in the Middle East have destabilized the world… and bred terrorism,’ they play to militarism and nationalism.”

Will the Democrats lack of commitment to a specific exit date lead to anti-war voters staying home on Election Day? 

“I hope not,” replied Winograd. “I hope voters remember who took us to war and the lies used to justify sending our young men into harm's way. I would urge Democratic candidates to speak the truth about the Bush administration's reckless foreign policy and to call for bringing the troops home within six months.”

Will Democrats energize their base?
She said, “Democrats need to take a stand if they want to energize the party's base to get out the vote.”

But it seems the tighter the race, the less likely it is that the Democratic candidate will take a clear-cut exit position as Winograd would like.

For instance in Minnesota, where Democratic Sen. Mark Dayton is retiring and Republicans have a chance to pick up a Senate seat, Democratic candidate Amy Klobuchar told MSNBC.com on Memorial Day, “We should bring a significant number of the troops home this year and hopefully get the rest out.”

She did not define “significant” nor did she explain why she included the adverb “hopefully.”

The official Democratic position, if there is one, came July 30 in a letter sent by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, and key committee members to President Bush.

“We believe that a phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq should begin before the end of 2006,” they said, but they did not specify how rapidly the redeployment should proceed or the date by which the last U.S. soldier would be out.

Pelosi and the polls
Why did it take Democratic leaders so long to get to this cautious position?

One answer came from Pelosi herself in comments she made in June, 2005. She indicated that she was looking at public opinion polls and hoping the poll data would force Bush’s hand.

Asked whether the House would some day get to a point where it would cut off funding for military operations in Iraq, Pelosi replied, “The public will get there first,” she said. “Their approval of this war is down to 37 percent in today’s poll; in March, it was 47 percent.”

Pelosi called that polling data “a drastic change. The more people who die, the less worth I think the American people will deem it.”

She added, “I think the president is going to bring them home. Thirty-seven percent approval in this country for our troops fighting a war? The president is going to bring them home.”

That hasn’t happened yet, despite Pelosi's prediction.

Even as they chide Bush for not offering a specific plan, Democratic candidates argue it’s not their job to present their own.

Exit plan is the president's job
Matt McKenna, a spokesman for Democratic Senate candidate Jon Tester in Montana said, “his call is for the president to come up with a plan for an exit strategy.”

And what’s Tester’s plan? “It is incumbent on the president and the Pentagon to make a plan,” McKenna replied. Tester “believes that is the president’s job and the secretary of defense’s job.” 

There are a few candidates trying to hold Democrats’ feet to the fire on Iraq, but apart from Lamont, who had the luxury of pouring $4 million of his own money into his campaign, none has yet had success.

A Green Party candidate, Byron De Lear, will be on the ballot against twelve-term incumbent Rep. Howard Berman, D- Calif., who voted for the Iraq war resolution.

In May, Berman’s campaign committee chipped in $2,000 to Lieberman’s re-election campaign.

“Both parties are responsible for the U.S.'s disastrous policies in Iraq and in the Middle East,” De Lear said Tuesday. “We especially seek the defeat of Democrats who, like Sen. Lieberman, have supported the Bush agenda. My opponent, Rep. Howard Berman is the Joe Lieberman of the House.”

No matter how droll his sound-bite, it’s hard to imagine the anemically funded De Lear being able to “do a Lamont” on Berman.

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

U.S. deficit sets October record of $176.4 billion Obama team reaches out to airline industry Jobless claims fall to lowest level since January Source: U.S. envoy objects to troop increase Oral history of Bush presidency planned Diplomats question role of Iran nuke plant   Palin: McCain aides kept me ‘bottled up’ Tough choices on abortion coverage Of bats and billions: Following stimulus funds For Obama, defining China is a challenge Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: