79 Comments - Bill Baar - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 7:18 am: I think it’s the only issue worth talking about in 2006. Dems can and should stand up there and ask about the just released video from UBL with the 911 hijackers and ask what’s going wrong here. DoD is one of the largest employer too with RI Arsenal too… a lot of folks from the area have gone over to Iraq and Afganistan in comparison to other districts I bet. - Rich Miller - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 7:31 am: People, either direct your responses to the question or don’t comment. I am already deleting posts that have nothing whatsoever to do with the question. This is not a debate over what Bush did, or what the Democrats did, etc. This is about what a candidate for Congress in Illinois plans to do. - Anonymous - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 7:44 am: This is absolutely appropriate. National security is the most important issue for Americans. If we mess this up there possibly will not be another chance. We need to do everything possible to protect this country and world. If the terrorist get their way this world will end. If they get their wish nothing else matters. These are not rational people. We should not only be discussing national security but world security. - Patricia Reid Lindner - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 8:04 am: I’m okay with politically capitalizing on this. This has been a halmark of our Republican Party in the 21st century and we SHOULD capitlize on this. We should be proud of what we’ve accomplished with the war on terror and the war in Iraq. 9/11 and the subsequent War in Iraq has brought our Country closer together. Our economy is doing well, and Americans are better off than at any time in the history of this Country. I say Nationalism is good! - Gimmieabreak - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 8:09 am: Usually when people who do these things it’s because they do not have a strong message and need something to get them press coverage. I wouldn’t say it is “politicizing a national tragedy”, but simply taking advantage of it. Pretty weak “stunt” is more like it. Too bad. It’s great that Andrea Zinga is knowledgeable in national security and the poor people in her districts are just a bunch of buffoons bumbling along without a clue. Save us from ourselves!!! - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 8:12 am: I think it’s a shame that people use the deaths of thousands of Americans for political gain. I think that this is purely capitalizing on the 9/11 legacy. This could be done on any other day of campaign season if they wanted to talk about security. I live in one of the towns she is visiting and I fully plan on protesting her visit. - Bill Baar - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 8:18 am: …the poor people in her districts are just a bunch of buffoons bumbling along without a clue… This district may be more knowledgable then most. Hiring for Iraq and Afgan reconstruction is managed out of Rock Island (or at least it was, the office seems to bounce around). I’ve applied for contract audit jobs and have found myself calling RI and talking with people who were getting ready to deploy or just returned. Zinga will find a lot of people with first hand knowledge… - The PFC - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 8:21 am: It’s ok to make national security an issue, it’s a little tacky to give away the signs. But after the last campaign no one is accusing Zinga of having class. - Wumpus - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 8:24 am: National security is an issue that needs to be discussed. Do it in a tasteful way and the date, 9/11 is a stark reminder of what still needs to be done. Rich made me be all serious! - Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 8:43 am: Is that really Pat Lindner? Just as I don’t think it’s okay to protest at the funerals of soldiers to try to score political points, I don’t think it’s okay to stand on top of the graves of 3,000 dead Americans to try to score political points. Distributing flags on September 11th, 2006 is an especially hollow gesture when it never crossed your mind in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005. Republicans need to spend a little less time distributing flags and a little more time distributing body armor. - VanillaMan - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 9:21 am: We are at war and the largest bloodiest attack on US soil since the Civil War occurred on September 11th. She is campaigning. What is she supposed to do? Nothing? That would be completely insane. This anniversary is the most important event in our lives. To ignor this would be politically deaf. It is vital for female candidates to demonstrate strong support for national security. Zinga has to do something. Nothing is not an option. YDD has a point, except in this case he is wrong. Zinga is not a nobody. Anyone who uses graves for a political podium AND has no other reason to be heard from - THAT person is using the dead to score points and has a special place reserved in Hell for them. Political leaders are exempt from this because they are responsible for all issues. We need to know their opinions on all issues. During wartime, they need to tell us. That isn’t using the war dead - it is merely telling us. Anti-war candidates tell us, pro-war candidates tell us. In both cases they are telling voters where they stand on the number one issue facing voters during that election year. Ever since Jimmy Carter effectively demonstrated how to politically score with “holier-than-thou” statements, it seems everyone wants to get into the act and pretend to one-up their opponents. Those who claim that candidates are using the dead as a political platform are just playing another game in an attempt to make an opponent look bad. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 9:27 am: Lincoln using the battlefield of Gettsyburg to rally the country = Right Values. Zinga using the graves of Sept. 11th victims to rally her own election = Wrong Values. - Anonymous - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 9:36 am: Rich, Sometimes you like to give your readers a little gift. Check out SagebrushPatriot.com and click on America. - charlie johnston - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 9:38 am: YDD, Andrea has some very serious, sober points to make. If you don’t think the worst attack on our soil is a fit subject for comment by people who seek to represent us, what exactly do you think is? The attack happened in part because of a series of governmental failures and refusals to take threats seriously. That is not just a fit subject for discussion at this time; it is probably the most important subject we have to discuss. - Former National Guard - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:02 am: “Tacky” someone said. Giving out our symbol of freedom is now tacky to a yellow dog democrat. No wonder your in the minority nationally. I say Zinga is right on and should be commended. - TID - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:03 am: Boy, the hyper-ventilation and abject terror some people try to push about the “war on terror” is nothing short of breathtaking. As is the elaborate efforts of some to defend Zinga’s goofy attempt to inject herself into something which should be a solemn occasion for rememberance and reflection. The suggestion that Zinga has no choice in the matter, that to do nothing isn’t an option, is preposterous. She doesn’t have to do what she plans to do. What she could do, and should do, is to attend some obse4rvances or do so herself, quietly, and with dignity. If she has some ideas on national security she wants to convey, I’d say September 12th is a good time to do so, or September 28th, or September 9th, for that matter. The ONLY reason she’d pull this stunt on Sept. 11 is precisely to capitalize on the event for her own personal political purposes. And what is the event, but the anniversary of the deaths of thousands. Tacky, tacky, tacky. About as no-class as her attempt to attack Evans for not being able to march in parades due to his illness, suggesting that she could, and any candidate who couldn’t march in parades is somehow unworthy of the office. I hope her people keep coming up with these brilliant ideas. - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:12 am: Charlie, as Zinga’s campaign manager, I doubt I can convince you that you are mistaken in your efforts, but I hope you could at least realize that it is not the issue of terrorism or national security that is being debated. It is your campaigns attempt to exploit the attention being given to the 5th anniversary of the event that is under question. If Andrea has some issues with national security, why not issue a press release? Why not have a press conference? Why not wait until the debates? Any of those things can be accomplished on any day between now and November 7th. But to instead do a tour of the district on the anniversary of 9/11. I find that tacky. Perhaps you would like to do a tour of my familes houses on the anniversary of our grandmothers death talking about taxes??? - Greg - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:18 am: Talk about it. Most definately. It would be refreshing to see important things discussed in a campaign. - Rich Miller - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:21 am: Some of you are only talking about part of the story. Besides discussing national security, she will ” distribute over 1000 American Flag yard signs that have “We Won’t Forget” on them to commerate the 5 year anniversary of the horrific day of 9-11-01.” So, take it all in. - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:24 am: Rich, she distributed those signs in the primary as well. I can’t say I saw an instance in my town that a sign appeared without a Zinga sign next to it. So in my opinion it is once again using 9/11 to further her campaign. If I recall correctly, she also tacked on a ‘we support the tropps’ sign as well. Now I am not saying she is requiring anyone to take a sign, but just that it happened to work out that in my town 100% of the time it happened. - HANKSTER - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:29 am: The flags, the day, everything about it is political. Obviously national secuirty is important and should be talked about, but if she really wanted to talk about it and was serious about it she would not have done it with the flags and yard signs ect…do we know if the signs will have her name on them? That would be a joke. There was an interesting piece in the WSJ today about national/local issues in House races this year. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115767600909057090.html?mod=googlenews_wsj - Bill Baar - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:31 am: Nothing wrong with the flags, as for we won’t forget I’d rather see no subtitute for victory. - charlie johnston - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:36 am: Robbie, I appreciate your sincerity, but you miss the point. If I intentionally came to your house on the anniversayr of your grandma’s death to discuss taxes, that would be exploitation. If, on the other hand, your grandma was killed by the collapse of a crumbling bridge, I came out to discuss the critical importance of the maintenance of our roadways, that would be very much on point. To discuss security on the anniversary of one of our greatest security failures is not just appropriate - it is important in determining how we prevent such from happening again. - Skeeter - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:40 am: Former National Guard, There is absolutely nothing wrong with distributing flags. Doing so to get votes with the implication that only you care about America? Yes, that is tacky. And a bit shameful. And definitely a sign of how our political discourse has fallen from a real debate about issues to merely insulting the patriotism of an opponent. On some level, though, you have to admire the stunt. She has a massively uphill battle and needs some publicity. This got it. Desperate people do desperate things and this is a classic example. The low road may be the place to be if it can take you where you want to be. I suspect it will backfire since it will get people talking about how the B-Team has failed on issues like defeating the Taliban, port security, etc., but you do have to admire her for doing something to try and get attention. - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:42 am: Charlie - In your scenario, I would still prefer that you not come on the anniversary of the bridge collapse. I don’t want to get too into our mock scenario though. It’s not that there shouldn’t be a discussion on national security, but it should be happening every day of the year, not just when it is advantagous for media coverage. - grand old partisan - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:48 am: It’s a grey area, Rich. Sliding scale stuff. Is it any more or less appropriate than the Governor using the Reed/White tragedies as a platform to attack Topinka over her NRA rating? Moreover, it’s all about motives. In order for this to really be inappropriate, she would - as YDD demonstrates - have to be doing this purely for her own political gain. You can’t prove that is so anymore than you can prove or disprove that Pat Quinn attends all those funerals purely out of compassion for the families. - Scott Fawell's Cellmate - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:54 am: Charlie, If a group of people wearing stickers stating “Veterans for Duckworth” came to the Zuniga campaign office and asked for 1000, 500, or even just 100 of your “American Flag yard signs that have ‘We Won’t Forget’ on them to commerate the 5 year anniversary of the horrific day of 9-11-01″ to distribute the yard signs at or around VA hospitals, military cemetaries, public libraries or other places designed to attract attention, then would Zuniga give the signs to these veterans ? If not, why not ? - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:58 am: Scott - It’s Zinga, not Zuniga. Though that is the last name of Daphne Zuniga who was the lead acress in the movie Spaceballs - Bill Baar - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:04 am: If not, why not ? politica signs illegal on fed property. - charlie johnston - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:15 am: We don’t ask about the politics of the many people who have been stopping by our office since yesterday to pick them up. And no, we would not give large quznmtites to another campaign. But anyone who wants one or two is welcome to stop in while supplies last. - Former National Guard - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:28 am: Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 10:24 am: Rich, she distributed those signs in the primary as well. ************************** THIS IS NOT TRUE. THE FLAGS WERE DONATED BY A STAFF MEMBER THAT WAS IN IRAQ DURING THE PRIMARY. - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:40 am: Former national Guard, I tried to make it clear in my post that I was pointing out that from my experience the never forget signs were directly connected to having Zinga signs. I never said that they were funded by Zinga, and I even made a point to say that I didn’t feel like they were required. Calm down dude. - values matter - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:41 am: This is over-the-top politicizing of a national tragedy. National security issues are important in a campaign for Congress, but this is a typical over-the-top GOP activity that is directed from the national GOP. Zinga, like a good little soldier, will be a rubber stamp. But if you’re Phil Hare you welcome this as it hangs a lantern on the weaknesses of the Bush-Cheney team in the area of national security. - Lovie's Leather - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:41 am: I am a little upset that this is even an issue. Why isn’t everyone, Republican and Democrat, doing the same thing to honor the victims of 9/11? It might win her some votes, but it would certainly win Phil Hare votes if he did the exact same thing. I guess I didn’t know that terrorism and murder against Americans was a strictly partisan issue… - Scott Fawell's Cellmate - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:42 am: Robbie is correct: Daphne Zuniga starred in Spaceballs. And I hope I speak for all Americans when I state Spaceballs is a great movie. And for those people who do not like Spaceballs, I simply ask: why do you hate our troops ? - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:45 am: Lovie, eveyone isn’t doing it because many of us feel that using 9/11 as a campaign tactic isn’t morally right. Murder and terrorism isn’t a strictly partisan issue. But exploiting those issues for political gain seems to be. - Bridget Dooley - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:51 am: Does anyone have a picture of these signs? Charlie, care to take one and send it to Rich? Of course it’s political opportunism. One would expect no less from a Republican who has not a damn thing to stand behind within her own party. What else can the Republicans campaign on? That said, I think she really missed the boat on the opportunism front. She could have done something quite meaningful to commemorate the day, such as help out military families who are struggling economically or do something for the local “first responders”. I’d be really surprised if there wasn’t a military family in that district that couldn’t use a home renovation by Zinga’s campaign staff and volunteers. Something like that would have made more sense. Then again, the signs do pander to Americans’ love of taking the easy way out on contributing to humanity. THey should have thrown some car magnets in there, too. - Bill Baar - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:59 am: Why isn’t everyone, Republican and Democrat, doing the same thing to honor the victims of 9/11? There is a time and a place to honor victims for sure…. but I’d like to think Zinga’s effort, opportunistic or not, its to debate the ways to win a war against Radical Islam. Rest assured UBL is thinking about the next way to attack us. - The Conservative - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 12:09 pm: Absolutly is an issue for discussion. If a candidate feels they support or are against our National policy then it needs to be discussed. I as a voter will make my voting decision to elect the person I agree with. After all if I support President Bush, then I want to elect someone that supports President Bush. - Huck Finn - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 12:37 pm: I’m going to listen to what Ms. Zinga has to say. While she’s saying it, I will put it in the context of her standing in front of the south side of the Pentagon speaking in front of the Pentagon staffers that were there helping victims, and judge for myself just how appropriate it is. - charlie johnston - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 12:57 pm: Thank you, both, Huck and Bill Baar. Andrea had the first press conference in the Quad Cities this morning - and it was extremely well received. And Bill, that is exactly the substance of what she had to say…it is not enough to mourn the lost: we must have a vigorous discussion on how to prevent more from being lost. It should be the great debate of our time…because all our futures depend on it. - Skeeter - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 1:04 pm: Hey Charlie, Did she address why Republicans believe that chemical plant security should be the responsibility of the private sector despite: 1. An attack on a chemical plant could kill thousands, and 2. Chemical plant owners have done little to nothing to provide security? If she is going to pass out flags, she should at least tell us if she agrees to the B-Team approach to what is probably the greatest security threat facing America. - Jim Mowen - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 1:07 pm: It is extremely appropriate - and necessary. As an earlier comment noted, National Security/ Terrorism is ‘the’ issue not just in this election, but for our Country. There is no more appropriate day in which to do this either. We need to recall the lessons of 9-11… 1. That we were a united Country at that time. 2. We appreciated the fact that this war against terror was a long-term effort, and 3. That we were prepared to sacrafice as a Country to win this war. Many on the left have forgotten these lessons and the very future of our Country may very well lie in the ability of the people of the United States recalling the feeling of 9-11-2001 and 9-12-2001. It is the proper discussion, it is the proper timing. - charlie johnston - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 1:26 pm: Skeeter, the opposition’s approach HAS been appeasement. I know you would like to find a nice euphemism for it, but that is your approach, whether you find a pleasant euphemism or not. (I would suggest ‘Peace in our time’, but that euphemism was taken by a previous generation’s appeasers). And Jim, I very much appreciate your comments - and you will be happy to know that every one of the points you mentioned are covered in her remarks. This is serious stuff which deserves serious comment. - Jim Mowen - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 1:34 pm: Skeeter, of course the last line was a cheap shot at anyone who has forgotten the lessons learned on 9-11 (opposition or not). I will stand by my post - we were indeed united as Americans to deal with the terrorism that we felt on 9-11-2001. Because we have been terrorism-free on US soil since that time is no reason to fall into a false sense of security and our insolated little world of convenience as some would like. I ran against Zinga because I felt as though she was a weak candidate, but I have to give her credit for dealing with this aggressively. - Skeeter - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 1:39 pm: Hey Charlie, Interesting that you would make that statement, when you support a President who has turned tail and run from the Taliban in southern Afghanistan. To refresh your recollection: 1. Iraq DID NOT attack America on 9/11 and and NO ties to Bin Laden; 2. The Taliban DID support Bin Laden in every way, and the Republican response has been to turn the job of fighting the Taliban over to NATO, the Commander of which yesterday complained of lack of troops causing Taliban gains. Use those names, Charlie, if it makes you feel better. It sure beats admitting the tragic failures of your team. Whatever it takes to allow you to sleep at night. - Anonymous - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 1:46 pm: Rich, I thought that this was not going to be a debate on Iraq? - Veritas - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 1:59 pm: Charlie, You’re right, this is a serious issue which requires thoughtful debate resulting in action. That said, it seems your campaign’s actual thinking on this matter is: Political Hack #1: “Sept. 11th is just around the corner, how do we get earned media while addressing the issue?” Political Hack #2: “I’ve got it, let’s submit a press release and give a speech touting our stance on national security!” Political Hack #1: “Good idea, but that won’t get us on TV. We need to have Andrea doing something, something patriotic. You know, wrap her in the flag for the occasion.” Political Hack #2: “Why don’t we have her tour the district handing out commemorative yard signs? People love the flag and everybody supports the troops.” Political Hack #1: “Great! Now all we need is to put together the speech and press release. You do that while I make a few calls and see if we can get a TV News Crew to follow Andrea for the day or at least meet us at a few key locations to film her puting up the signs.” Seems tacky to me. She needs to address the issues raised by Sept. 11th, but this doesn’t seem like the right way to do it. - Scott Fawell's Cellmate - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:10 pm: Robbie raised a good point earlier in this thread that has been unjustly overlooked: Daphne Zuniga starred in Spaceballs. My question to Zuniga-wanna-be Zinga and Zuniga-lover Hale: Spaceballs - great movie or greatest movie ? Explain. - Backyard Conservative - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:18 pm: Democrats talk about funding first responders to a disaster at home without thinking about the larger issue of why we need to do that. Our front line in the war on terror is overseas. When we went after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, those terrorists found refuge in Iraq and Iran. We are fighting them now in Iraq, better than fighting them here. But we need to be prepared here, right Dems? Chicago just completed a drill and we have a story in the Wilmette Life about fed funds coming in to secure our water plant, the Bahai temple (a faith persecuted in Iran)and the Coast Guard station, which protects all of us around here: http://www.pioneerlocal.com/cgi-bin/ppo-story/localnews/current/wi/09-07-06-1023828.html Zinga is running for Congress and meeting with community leaders. I think it is entirely appropriate to remember those who died on Sept 11th and ensure it never happens again. Are flags only for Republicans, is that it? Why should distributing flag signs be controversial? No better illustration can be made of un-patriotic Dem behavior, as much as they protest that they love our country, they hate to see our flag. - Skeeter - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:25 pm: Backyard, We don’t hate to see our flag. Unlike so many in the B-Team, many of us fought for it. What we hate to see is the flag used as little more than a campaign poster, which is exactly what Zinga is trying to do. She is not doing this out of any great sense of love for the flag. If she did, then she would have done it when she wasn’t running. I don’t recall non-candidate Zinga going around passing out flags. The flag has dignity. It should be more than just something to waive to say “Vote for me because I like this more than you” which is exactly the point of her whole event. - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:34 pm: Backyard conservative. I am a democrat and I love the flag. But you know what I hate? I hate using the flag as a reason to put up a political yard sign. And that’s what it is. I have stated before that in my experience, those flags they give out are always accompanied by a Zinga sign. As far as all the other comments. I once again want someone to give me one good reason that the only day Zinga could pick to talk about national security was the 11th of September? If 9/11 is as important as all of you say, shouldn’t we be talking about it 365 days a year? Or should we take the Zinga approach and only do it on days when the cameras and microphones are turned on??? If Zinga cares so much about national security why is it left off her website? There is a short mention of the the war on terrorism which doesn’t address national security, there is a section on the patriot act which doesn’t address security or our lack of personal freedoms, and a itzy bitzy section on the NSA. Her war on terrorism section doesn’t mention once Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin-Laden, or any other terrorist threat. It doesn’t mention even one way in which the 17th district can become safer from a terrorist incident. It simply talks about Iraq and supporting soldiers. In the discussion of the patriot act, national security isn’t mentioned in there. It does a good job of drawing the line between protecting the public and taking away civil rights, but that’s it. Maybe that’s why these press conferences are needed, so she can finally develop a stance on national security. - Jim Mowen - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:38 pm: Skeeter, Robbie - Come on, now we are going to criticize politicians for being political? Let’s face it, none of us hand out flags 365 days a year, but does that mean a politician cannot speak of defense or patriotism? Obama never went to Africa before. Does the fact that his Africa trip was purely political diminish his right to go there, or obtain political value from it? Come on guys, let’s think of the two-way street… - Skeeter - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:45 pm: Jim, Your post says it all. You view our flag as nothing more than a prop — the equivalent of a trip to another country. Some of us moderates view it as more than that — something sacred that she not be dirtied by use as a campaign sign to wave. For all your talk about the love for the flag, you really do not seem to be too concerned with keeping its honor and dignity. - Rich Miller - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:50 pm: Jim, I think this was Obama’s second trip, but I get your drift. - Jim Mowen - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:51 pm: I said all of that? - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 2:56 pm: Jim, I am not criticizing a politician for being political. I am criticizing Zinga for being political at the expense of dead americans. The flag thing… Why wouldn’t she pick flag day to hand out flags?Was June 14th not a good day for her? Or maybe it just didn’t fit well into the political season??? That’s all I keep trying to say. That while the idea might be decent, the intentions are not. I am not against handing out flags, I am not against talking about national security. But I am against exploiting the tragic nature of 9/11 while doing it. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:07 pm: Just for kicks, I went to Zinga’s website to see what she’s had to specifically say about national security. She might want to spend a little less time handing out flags and a little more time developing a policy. What she had to say of substance could fit on a postcard: -”We have not had a terrorist attack on American soil since 9-11 and must do all within our power to keep it that way.” [no specifics listed] -”It is our duty as the American people to support them [the troops] in that belief [that they are fighting for freedom]” -”That we are going to depart from Iraq, leaving it to its own people to grow and defend, must be widely recognized there and here. How else to promote the responsibility we seek? That we must not set a firm timetable seems obvious until we can say Iraq is stabilized and capable of self-protection and self-rule.” [no plan for making that happen, and no criticism of the current path] -”The best course of action with the Patriot Act is regular review, to sunset or remove certain provisions as they are deemed unnecessary—in some cases unnecessarily restrictive to our freedoms, and in others unnecessary from a practical, preventive point of view.” [earlier noting that it doesn’t appear to resrict civil liberties] -”The question of presidential authority to bypass the National Security Agency is one for our courts to decide. A President’s powers are, by nature of our governmental framework, constantly subject to review and interpretation of existing law.” I hope at every campaign stop, reporters will ask Zinga “Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush’s handling of the war in Iraq,” and keep hammering her until they get a simple yes or no. - Rich Miller - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:10 pm: ===”We have not had a terrorist attack on American soil since 9-11 and must do all within our power to keep it that way.”=== Everybody forgets the anthrax. Anyway, back to the question. - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:25 pm: Rich, that one doesn’t count because we couldn’t find anyone from outside the U.S. to be involved!!!! - Coloradem - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:28 pm: It is wholly inappropriate. I’m rather surprised that a midwestern candidate–from Illinois no less–has decided to do this. Sounds much more like a nutcase stunt from a southern Republican or our own Marilyn Musgrave or Tom Tancredo from Colorado. I doubt this will work for her in Evans’ district. They are a bit more sophisticated… - charlie johnston - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:33 pm: I can’t say how the media will report her comments, but after Monday they will be posted in their entirity on her website. You can then read them and decide for yourself whether they were appropriate or exploitive. Many of you here will not agree with them, but you will be hard-pressed to argue they are not serious. - zinged again - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:34 pm: Come on, I think that Zinga is as bad of a candidate as they come. Her recent bout with plagerism shows that her talking points are anything but self-generated. However, even I will say that talking National Security on ANY day, but especially on the day that is now forever linked with National Security - what on earth could be wrong with that. ***Further, I want to see the posts flying from all those critical of Zinga on this issue, criticizing all the Democrats that will be using the 9-11 date for their own political gain. - Lovie's Leather - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:36 pm: YDD, I went to Phil Hare’s website to see what he thinks about national security and terrorism. Now, everything inside the quotation marks comes from his website. “” If you click on issues, you get 6 options 1. agriculture 2. healthcare 3. economic development 4. fair trade 5. jobs 6. small business So, as you can see, Phil Hare has the average democratic strategy for the war on terror…. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:40 pm: Good one Lovie. I’ve never claimed to be impressed by Phil Hare. I noticed you haven’t answered Rich’s question regarding the Zinga “Wrap Myself in the Flag” Tour. Is this appropriate behavior, or politicizing a national tragedy? - HANKSTER - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 3:44 pm: Leather: And the Republican plan for “winning” the war on terror is??? Attack Iraq? - Robbie - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 4:04 pm: LL - at least it has lots of nice pretty pictures… But your right, that website always has been a step behind in content. - Fearless Freep - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 4:28 pm: Why is this even a question?! Congress votes on legislation pertinent to national security. The House of Representatives appropriates money for defense and national security. Read the Constitution sometime - I will remind people that under the Constitution, the main role of the federal government is defense and trade (NOT education or health care or “creating jobs”, etc.) So yes, Andrea Zinga is doing the right thing by discussing this issue and running on it. - values matter - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 4:48 pm: Democrats, Mr. Johnston, are supporting a stronger and smarter national security policy. That’s Phil Hare’s approach, that’s the Democratic approach. The Bush-Cheney national security policies, including the war in Iraq, have been riddled with ineffectiveness. If that is what Ms. Zinga intends to talk about, great, bring it on, we should all talk about that. In that spirit, I hope Phil Hare joins her in the spirit of national unity and national purpose to come up with ideas to make our nation safer. Waving flags won’t do it. - Bubs - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 5:54 pm: Flags, Never Forgetting 9-11, or national security - all fair game in an election. But a political event on 9-11-06 itself would be far too crass. That day is just too painful, still, and a day of national, not Republican or Democratic, remembrance. - Anonymous - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 6:55 pm: 9/11 is going to be politicized, as it has been for the last five years. That won’t stop. Wow. If I were Andrea Zinga, I’d be a little concerned that my campaign manager is spending the entire day posting on a website, instead of running my campaign. Do you see any other campaign managers posting on here? No, there out running their candidate’s campaigns. - Fearless Freep - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 7:03 pm: We can best judge Phil Hare by what his mentor Lane Evans did. His record in Congress is one of being AGAINST defense and intelligence appropriations. Lane was never considered a “hawk” on defense. For a Marine, we should expect better. Phil Hare seeks to emulate Lane Evans. It is hard to believe that Phil Hare would be strong on defense. There is nothing to suggest that. And carping about Arsenal jobs doesn’t count. Andrea Zinga has a better perspective on national and global issues. Because of her career, she has been outside of Western Illinois and she sees the big picture. When it comes to national security and foreign policy, Zinga will be able to grasp complex issues or at least learn the ropes very quickly. I know Phil Hare, too and I cannot say that about him. Let’s just say Phil is much more narrow in his scope of thinking. If he gets in Congress, he will be way out of his element. The 17th district deserves better. - Fearless Freep - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 8:01 pm: Any candidate for congress has an obligation to talk about national security and defense. If she wants to give out flags and things, why is that such a “hot story”? I don’t know how gently I can say this, but if it is good enough for the US Constitution, it’s good enough for this blog: and I quote: Article 1, Sec. 8 Congress has the authority to “provide for a common defense” and also “repel invasions”. - Lovie's Leather - Friday, Sep 8, 06 @ 11:05 pm: and Hankster, the democrats plan is doing nothing. Sure, Clinton attacked Iraq via missile attack. But did that really help anyone? He was a cut and run kind of guy. I’ve never liked democratic foreign policy. I won’t scream about Clinton other than foreign policy, which is a horrid detriment to his legacy. Maybe you are right about Iraq, maybe not. But I have yet to hear a democratic plan that wasn’t cut and run or setting a date to leave. Neither is a plan, it is just meaningless rhetoric. So, I think that Zinga having any sort of thought on foreign policy is a plus. And I still can’t figure out why everyone isn’t wrapping themselves in the flag… of course, many of you being democrats, you leave the government to do your job…. - charlie johnston - Saturday, Sep 9, 06 @ 12:21 am: Ah yes, Anon 6:55, that was a criticism aimed by a lot of people during the primary when some of you who didn’t like my ideas pulled it out to suggest I was not doing justice to my other candidate, David McSweeney. Yet go figure, he won anyway. Back then, I was posting frequently on Illinoize, as well. Unfortunately, with the pressures of two campaigns I can’t post with any regularity right now. But you would be surprised at how little time it takes to write a paragraph speaking up for these fine people. Congresswoman Zinga…Congressman McSweeney. Get used to it because they will both be there soon - and America will be better for it. Wow…I’ve wasted all of three minutes writing this. What the heck…might as well give it another 30 seconds…Judge McGlynn. Get used to that one, too. And if any of you want to pick up a flag yard sign, come on down. - NoGiftsPlease - Saturday, Sep 9, 06 @ 7:11 am: Anything is fair game in a campaign. The point of advertising for a candidate (which is all this is) is to get people worked up enough to remember the name. Connect the name with a heavy emotion and voila — name recognition. It doesn’t have anything to do with honoring anyone. And, by the way, whenever the politicians and media stop feeding us fear and victimization to manipulate us, we WILL forget. When was the last time anyone talked about the Murrah Federal Building? How about other “days that will live in infamy?” It is all about manipulation. - Scott - Saturday, Sep 9, 06 @ 9:37 am: The one thing that my door and Andrea Zinga have in come is thier political skills. Yes, 9/11 is far game, as it should be… but you don’t scheduel an event just to milk the anniversary. Just as she lost in 04 due to stupidity, she will do the same now. Perhaps its time for the Republicans to find a candidate who can walk, chew gum, and win at the same time. - ex-Brooklynite - Saturday, Sep 9, 06 @ 10:32 am: NoGiftsPlease, If you were in Manhattan on 9/11/01, or if you had family or friends in Manhattan on that day, you will never forget no matter how much time passes or how the media and politicians treat future anniverseries. No one can forget the desperate attempts to locate loved ones who may have died when the towers collapsed. I’m from New York and I spent that morning doing just that. And if Andrea Zinga didn’t do the same , then she should offer a solemn, dignified statement of solidarity with the people directly affected by the attacks, and pledge to work to ensure that something like this never happens again, instead of cynically trying to brand herself and her party with the memory of 9/11. That means taking terrorism seriously, not using it as a partisan symbol, and not sending even more thousands of Americans to die in Iraq while Osama bin Laden remains a threat. - zinged again - Tuesday, Sep 12, 06 @ 7:35 am: Turned out to be a bad decision for Zinga, as the press had too many stories to cover. It appears that she got little coverage over this… Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.