Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Madigan wants answers about “mob ties”
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
Roskam backs away from the notion that Duckworth wants to “cut and run” from Iraq.
Calling it “crude” and “offensive,” Democrat Tammy Duckworth’s campaign team is accusing Republican congressional rival Peter Roskam of tarring the war veteran who lost her legs in combat with advocating a “cut-and-run” strategy in Iraq.But Roskam’s camp fired back that the GOP state senator was being “misquoted” and “misrepresented” and Duckworth’s campaign was lying.
Here’s the context:
According to audio excerpts on WBBM’s Web site, Duckworth said a pullout of U.S. troops should be linked to ensuring that Iraqi police and national guard forces can defend the country. And she criticized Roskam for advocating the need to “finish well” in Iraq, suggesting it was meaningless.“I do think finishing well is a notion that resonates well within the 6th Congressional District,” Roskam responded. “I’ve knocked on over 5,300 doors in this campaign and have heard a wide range of opinions about whether we should have gone, whether we shouldn’t have gone, and so forth. I’ll tell you what. The 6th Congressional District is not a cut-and-run district. It is not a timetable district.”
Those excerpts in the Sun-Times aren’t complete. The full exchange is here, so you can listen for yourself.
As usual, I’m more interested in the political angle, and the war of words will most likely be the subject of my Sun-Times column this Friday.
Also, Duckworth has a new TV ad airing.
For nearly a year, 6th Congressional District hopeful Tammy Duckworth has been the antiwar candidate who didn’t much talk about Iraq.That all changes today as Duckworth begins airing a broadcast TV ad that introduces her to voters and makes clear her opposition to the war. The Iraq war veteran from Hoffman Estates blasts Congress, which she says “rubber-stamped the failed policies in Iraq.â€
“We did our duty, but when I came home I wondered, is Congress doing theirs?†says Duckworth, who looks into the camera for much of the 30-second commercial.
I’ll see if it’s available and post it later.
*** UPDATE *** Here is the new Duckworth ad:
*** UPDATE 2 *** I just noticed that the NRCC ad slamming Duckworth on immigration has been posted to YouTube.
*** UPDATE 3 *** Emily’s List just did a poll in the 6th. The MOE is very high because only 400 likely voters were polled, so take it for what it’s worth, which is not a huge amount. Consider it a fuzzy snapshot.
The poll was conducted September 18-20. This is from the polling memo distributed by Emily’s List.
The initial trial heat is tied: 41% for Duckworth, 41% for Roskam, and 18% Undecided. […]Duckworth is overwhelmingly preferred by voters as the candidate better qualified to “take the best course to get our troops home from Iraq,†43% to 30% over Roskam. Even more interesting, in a series of ten issues, there is not a single one in which Republican Roskam is judged better qualified than Tammy Duckworth, including “representing your values.†[…]
When voters are asked a generic “Democrat versus Republican†trial heat without names attached, the race is a dead heat at 41%, just like the initial trial heat. Later when voters are asked whether they would prefer a Democrat who is Pro Choice and supports embryonic stem cell research or a Republican who is Pro Life and opposes such research, the Pro Choice Democrat dominates, 51% to 35%.
President Bush’s positive job approval is 47% in this district, significantly higher than his national average. This does not, however, seem to be lifting the prospects of candidates like Roskam, as voters are highly dissatisfied with the job performance of the Republican-led Congress.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 8:33 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Madigan wants answers about “mob ties”
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I have a tough time seeing the middle way and I think that’s where Duckwroth trying to be.
If the war in Iraq an unwinnable mess, why not cut-and-run? That seems like the patriotic thing to do.
Or, is she in agreement with Rumsfeld critics, like Bill Kristol who say we need to add 30 to 40k more troops over there.
And does she agree with Emanual in the Easton article when he said I still believe that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do, okay?.
If she agrees, it seems to be it’s a question of the right tactics because, unlike Vietnam, we’ve got the local politics right in Iraq, it’s a tactical question of did we execute the occupation and rebuilding right.
It’s impossible for Duckworth because her core thinks Iraq wrong, probably immoral, and at their worse, a ruse by Bush to instill fear in the electorate. She needs every vote and can’t put that at risk.
I’m guessing, in her heart, she’s with Kristol.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 8:56 am
He should not have said that…he will probably lose…but the Duckworth folks should stop reminding us of her injuries…we know she was hurt, stop exploiting it.
Comment by Timmy Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:00 am
Timmy,
I haven’t had as much time as I would have liked to follow the 6th district race. It’s kind of tough when you live in the east side of the 5th. How has Duckworth’s campaign been exploiting her injuries?
Comment by Tweed Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:04 am
I like how Roskam is still trying to say Duckworth won’t debate, less than 24 hours after he dropped out of their biggest debate to go to a fundraiser with Bush. He is a fraud.
Comment by HANKSTER Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:09 am
Iraq and policies toward Iraq are fair game and further, Maj. Duckworth’s service does not make her immune from criticism.
But stating that a vet who lost her legs is guilty of “cut and run”?
That does cross the line.
The “run” part implies cowardice. For a personal injury lawyer to imply that a disabled American vet is a coward is extremely poor judgment.
If Roskam hnd any integrity — no sign of that so far — he would apologize.
Comment by Skeeter Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:20 am
Am I the only one that finds this just slightly funny? Maybe I am, so be it I guess.
Comment by Frank Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:26 am
So would Roskam still have us fighting the Viet Cong?
Seriously.
Under what circumstances would Roskam say things have gone badly enough that it’s time to change policy in Iraq?
Or does he want to merely pretend that Bush’s original decision to invade Iraq is infallible as long as he can get away with it.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:53 am
Froma Rosakm Email
Apparently, Tammy Duckworth’s campaign listened to a different debate than the one Senator Peter Roskam participated in last Friday. Earlier today, her campaign manager sent out an indignant email claiming, falsely, that Sen. Roskam accused her of wanting to “cut and run.” From Duckworth campaign manager’s email:
Not surprisingly, Peter Roskam got nasty, as a career politician can. He accused Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth of wanting to “cut and run” from Iraq. It makes you wonder - is he the kind of person we want to send to Washington?
What Roskam actually said:
Q: How about you, Senator Roskam? (inaudible)
PR: No, absolutely not, but I do think finishing well is a notion that resonates well within the 6th Congressional District. I’ve knocked on over 5,300 doors in this campaign and have heard a wide range of opinions about whether we should have gone, whether we shouldn’t have gone, and so forth. I’ll tell you why. The 6th Congressional District is not a cut and run district. It is not a timetable district. It does not embrace Nancy Pelosi, the Congresswoman from San Francisco who would become the speaker if my opponent were to win this race. It doesn’t embrace Congressman Murtha who likely would become the Majority Leader. It’s a district that wants to ask tough questions of the administration; wants to ask (inaudible) questions; wants to ask questions of our Iraqi partners - why there is so much corruption in the Iraqi government. It wants to ask questions of the international community as to why they haven’t ponied up the grants and pledges that they made back in 2003. But I believe wholeheartedly that the 6th Congressional District wants to finish our job in Iraq and finish it well.
Comment by Wumpus Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:08 am
From the Financial Times:
“During an election debate at the weekend in the outskirts of Chicago, Peter Roskam, the Republican candidate for Illinois’s sixth district, trotted out the familiar line that his Democratic opponent wanted America to “cut and run” from Iraq. His opponent, Tammy Duckworth, a former National Guard pilot who lost both her legs in Iraq last year when her helicopter was shot down by a rocket-propelled grenade, was visibly angry at the exchange. “I just could not believe he would say that to me,” said Ms Duckworth, who now walks on artificial legs with the help of a cane. “I have risked my life to serve my country and you cannot question my patriotism.”
Comment by Old Quack Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:10 am
“The 6th Congressional District is not a cut and run district.”
Yup, you’re right he didn’t imply that Duckworth advocates a “cut and run” strategy. In fact, he never used the words “cut and run”. Riiigghhhttt.
Isn’t it funny how Conservative Republicans apparently can’t read and have a tenuous grip on reality…
Comment by ChicagoCynic Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:22 am
I’ve always considered myself fairly cynical. But I’ve got to admit that Duckworth’s ad had me choked up and feeling a surge of patriotism for the Democratic candidate. Haven’t felt that way in too long. Bravo.
Comment by Phocion Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:22 am
“You cannot question my patriotism”. If that isn’t a “dishonest”, “unfair” statement, I don’t know what is.
Roskam has not, and will not, question Duckworth’s personal “patriotism” or her personal courage. What she will vote for or support as a politician is another thing altogether.
As Bill Baar points out above, without saying it, is that the Democratic position, including Duckworth’s, on Iraq is an incomprehensible muddle. As such, it is a fair conclusion to consider it a “cut and run” strategy, and Duckworth has to face that critique, instead of hiding behind her medals, as she is doing. As Nyberg inadvertantly admits, we “cut and ran” in Vietnam. 30 years later, it remains a totalitarian cess-pool. How does Duckworth’s “position” avoid the same consequences? How does her “position” matter anyway?
Shouldn’t we be concerned about Rahm Emanual’s “position” on Iraq, because that is how she will vote anyway?
By the way, all these liberals who want to sanctify Duckworth for her war injuries, I don’t seem to remember them all that interested in Bob Dole’s war injuries in 1996. It all depends which party you are with…
Comment by Conservative Republican Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:47 am
“The Democratic position, including Duckworth’s, on Iraq is an incomprehensible muddle”
And the Republican position is more of the same, we don’t have a plan, we are creating more terrorists, we are losing thousands of American lives, but we want more of it!
“Shouldn’t we be concerned about Rahm Emanual’s “position†on Iraq, because that is how she will vote anyway?”
Right, and Peter Roskam is not the person who A) said he would vote on ethics issues how the Speaker told him to B) copied word for word from the RNC his position on senior issues C) Has yet to stray away from national Republican talking points.
So yes, its Duckworth who will be a rubber stamp for her party.
Comment by HANKSTER Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 12:03 pm
Read the NIE report…leaving Iraq now will only embolden the terrorists. Yes, it was the wrong war, but now that we’re there, let’s finish the job.
Phocion, glad to hear you have a heart…and that you bought the only issue she’s running on.
Comment by Ted Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 12:25 pm
For what it’s worth, the NY Times has a story about how how negative ads are in congressional races all over the country…
“Democratic and Republican strategists said they expected over 90 percent of the advertisements to be broadcast by Nov. 7 to be negative.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/27/us/politics/27ads.html
Comment by Dan Vock Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 2:13 pm
“leaving Iraq will only embolden the terrorists”
What exactly does that mean? Sounds like more meaningless Republican rhetoric to me. Most of the people fighting in Iraq are Iraqi citizens fighting against the American occupation of their country.
There is no job to finish in Iraq when the problem is and will remain a political problem. No amount of military might will solve Iraq’s sectarian problems.
Comment by Bridget Dooley Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 2:40 pm
Bridget, your right about the political problem and in fact this war is the reverse of Vietnam. We have the politics right and struggle with the tactial situation.
Imagine a unified Vietnam -North and South- in 1968 or 1972 with national elections with wide participation and a gov with broad support.
What will be interesting to see with Duckworth is what if she wins and finds herself tacking right to hold a razon thin majority. I’m certain here service will not save her from some harsh criticism from those supporting her now.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 2:48 pm
footnote: The question I think Duckworth and Dems need to respond too, is ok, Iraq was a mistake… a second front which doesn’t pin down terrorists, but pins down the US. Is the alternative then Kerry’s War of Last Resort from the first debates?
That’s a strategy with at lot of appeal for Americans. It think it means wars of anniliation.
I think if Duckworth is going to stand with Kerry’s position there, we should know, because I believe it ultimately will mean hell for people in the middle east. No American President will hesitate to do the first strike if things become so bad, if there is no other resort than that….
They’ll be too much mud slung in this election for serious talk… but if the opportunity comes up, I’d really like to hear the candidates talk about what Kerry presented in that debate.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 2:59 pm
Bridget…open your eyes…and I’m not even a Republican, geez, try opening your mind too.
Comment by sigh Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 3:03 pm
CENTCOM just posted a captured letter to Zarqawi from last june. They don’t sound like they think they’re winning at the moment.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 3:16 pm
Dave Diersen over at Illinois Review calls the Fornek piece “Duckworth camp: ‘Cut and run’ crude Roskam team: He never said that of her Iraq stance - Scott Fornek”
Since Diersen keeps deleting my post over at Illinois Review, I’ll share it with you kids here since it’s the same topic:
Folks, you can listen to the tape of the WBBM debate.
Peter Roskam said “The 6th Congressional District is not a cut-and-run district. It is not a timetable district.”
He may not have said she advocated cutandrun but that is clearly what he is implying.
Of course, according to the Illinois state GOP leaving Iraq sooner rather than later is a (quote) “principled” stance. The GOP sent out a mailer saying 8th District candidate Bill Scheurer is “principled” for wanting to leave Iraq ASAP.
Maybe Roskam needs to get in touch with the GOP to get the latest talking points accurately.
Comment by NW burbs Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 3:54 pm
Conservative Republican demonstrates to all that he has not been paying attention…
C.R. writes “As Bill Baar points out above, without saying it, is that the Democratic position, including Duckworth’s, on Iraq is an incomprehensible muddle.”
Well, if by “an incomprehensible muddle” you mean:
- Increase the size of Special Forces to destroy Osama Bin Laden and terrorist networks like al Qaeda.
- Implement the bipartisan 9/11 Commission proposal to secure America’s borders and ports and screen every container.
- Fully man, train, and equip our National Guard and our police, firefighters and other first responders.
…Why then yes, I suppose those three basic points that Democrats keep trying to get through Congress are really so very incomprehensible. In fact, they must be so incomprehensible that that is why Republicans keep refusing to call the Dems’ proposals for an up-or-down vote.
Of course, since you are a “Conservative Republican” you probably already prefer the Republicans’ plan to “staythecourse”. What course is that? Why it includes:
- Nearly 3000 of our brave soldiers dead
- More than 20,000 of our intrepid troops injured, many have lost limbs, eyes, ears, etc.
- Underfunded, underequipped and undermanned troop rotations (”You go to war with the Army you have”)
- And no plan whatsoever for how to actually win the war, let alone end it
Great idea you’ve got there Conservative Republican, staying on the (wrong) course will surely help bring our hearty men and women in uniform back home safe, sound and soon…
–
But that’s not enough for you, is it Conservative Republican. You go on with more Great Republican (Non)Ideasâ„¢…
You ask with a twinge of whine in your writing “Shouldn’t we be concerned about Rahm Emanual’s “position†on Iraq, because that is how she will vote anyway?”
Funny, it was Dick Durbin who recruited Major Duckworth to run for Congress. Rep. Emanuel came into the picture after Senator Durbin talked with her about running.
But why let facts get in the way of a good rant, eh?
Speaking of, you’ve clearly missed the media interviews in which Major Duckworth has disagreed with Emanuel and Leader Pelosi.
Why are conservatives so afraid of an independent woman who has honorably served her country and who has not forgotten the principles and values this nation was founded on? Roskam has said over and over that he’d vote however the Republican leadership wants him to vote — even to the point of saying he thinks the Republicans’ Pork Gluttony is a good thing. By extension, he must believe saddling our kids with trillions in debt to Red China is also a good thing.
Still, that’s not enough for you. You feel the need to add one more zinger, but instead you fall flat on your face.
You take us back a decade to whine about Bob Dole of all people with this classic from the Winger Wurlitzer: “By the way, all these liberals who want to sanctify Duckworth for her war injuries, I don’t seem to remember them all that interested in Bob Dole’s war injuries in 1996. It all depends which party you are with…”
I seem to recall 1996 more clearly than you do. I remember many Democrats and independent folks who were handicapped wondering why Bob Dole didn’t do more to advance the ADA and other common sense measures which dramatically improve the lives of people with handicaps, whether from war, accident or birth.
Major Duckworth’s injuries have nothing to do with this until conservatives bring them up by attacking her home, her service and her honor.
She proves her willingness to stand up for America every time she takes a step.
Roskam is sadly proving the only people he’ll stand up for are radical conservatives who (when they have ideas at all) have ideas that Pres. Bush has shown are proven failures.
Comment by NW burbs Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 4:14 pm
Hankster and NW Burbs:
If your explication of “the state of the world” as set forth above is in fact Duckworth’s view (which she does not concede), and if the voters of the 6th District come to understand it as such, then the 6th District will go for Roskam.
Comment by Conservative Republican Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 4:49 pm
Huh?
What are you trying to say there Mr. Conservative Republican?
Can I play your “What if” game too?
If the temperature in Denver is greater than the RPMs of a vinyl record in Chatanooga then the leaves in Wisconsin will turn red in the next few weeks. If not, then the water on the Mississippi River from the Quad Cities to St. Louis might be choppy.
Comment by NW burbs Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 5:02 pm
Funny, it was Dick Durbin who recruited Major Duckworth to run for Congress. Rep. Emanuel came into the picture after Senator Durbin talked with her about running.
Man, I kept saying that to Cegelis supporters and they had fits about it in the Primary.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 5:36 pm
The term “cut and run” is a Republican slogan intended to imply that Democrats are less patriotic, less courageous and more cowardly. This is the same b.s. from the Vietnam era. For Roskam to use that code phrase in any context that refers to Duckworth is astonishingly crude given her service to our country. The quote is on tape, and yet Roskam tries to deny it. This is the same inability to accept responsibility that Bush has displayed so consistently in his term in office.
Comment by Max Maxwell Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 6:42 pm
Max you are right on. Roskam has more moves than Walter Payton. Slick Pete should explan the Sir Thomas More Shakedown Leauge and his George Ryan look a like SOS numbered ticket hustle.
As it relates to the “cut and run ” jive ; these chicken hawks won’t know an M16 from a P38 (C ration can opener). Petey should stick to telling us about his paper route and having cookies and milk on Mrs Miller’ front porch.
Comment by Charles Martel Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 8:36 pm
get them out, yes. cut and run–no way. Thanks Maxwell bad message. but had anyone seen the yard signs that I have? because I’m big on yard signs, local politics is where it starts. only in one, brave house in Springpatch it says, vote yes, to get our troops out. 9/11 was horrible to witness but more so that it was an excuse to go to war
Comment by anonymous Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 8:46 pm
I was in another state,eating breakfast when I saw CNN coverage about Roskam versus Duckworth. Should this have coverage yes indeed. It’s a big democrat versus republican statement as to whether she wins. I hope she wins
Comment by anonymous Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:07 pm
The term “cut and run†is a Republican slogan intended to imply that Democrats are less patriotic, less courageous and more cowardly. This is the same b.s. from the Vietnam era.
I thought Sen Aiken’s (D-VT) statement on Vietnam, The best policy is to declare victory and go home made sense at the time. Cut-and-Run seems a variant on it. If Iraq a lost cause, or worse creating more terrorists, I don’t seen any implied criticism of patriotism with it. It’s the only strategy that makes sense.
It abandons many allies in Iraq, as we did in Vietnam, but if you’re an American Firster (as Duckworth refers to herself in this ad) it makes sense. A lot of Americans our America Firsters… alway have been.
Comment by Bill Baar Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 7:25 am