Wyden to co-sponsor Biden resolution
According to the O, Senator Ron Wyden will co-sponsor the resolution by Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) that declares the Bush troop surge against our natural interest:
"It is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq;"
See the full resolution here. Discuss.
|
Jan. 20, 2007
Posted in in the news 2007. |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Jan 20, '07
Wyden's increasing prominence in the Senate for me doesn't necessarily foretell any greater political ambitions for him in my eyes (there's only, really one place further up to go than Senator, i.e. President, and he'll never run for that, and wouldn't make a good, strategic VP choice either) but it does me some good to see our Democratic representative being so active on the national level, he had been quiet for quite a while and I was wondering if he'd ever live up to his liberal/progressive OR-02 roots (Portland).
Moreover, it makes me wonder about the great things that having another Democratic Senator from Oregon could accomplish, and here's my point/question: no one has emerged yet to challenge Smith.
Is this normal? When does the clock start ticking? We've heard of so many people declining (the latest being DeFazio) that it makes me wonder if something isn't in the works behind the curtain. One explanation would be that all of the small fish are waiting to make sure that the big fish (i.e. Kitzhaber) really, truly aren't going to run before they jump in.
Anyone else with insight on whether or not the lack of any candidates at all on the Dem side bespeaks of backroom deliberations regarding a big candidacy? Or have we not reached the point yet when one can start to read that much into the absence of Dem challengers?
1:30 a.m.
Jan 21, '07
This is actually kind of sad. The Biden resolution is the weaker of the two primary responses to Bush's escalation to be considered in the Senate. It is a non-binding Sense of the Senate resolution which would have no legal standing and would be nothing more than mildly symbolic. The one that actually has some teeth to it is the Kennedy resolution. That's the one we need to get Wyden to support. The Biden resolution is so weak, it's probably one that Smith will support to show that he's doing something about Iraq. It'll probably be worth even more brownie points now that Wyden is a co-sponsor (you don't suppose that's part of the plan... I know Wyden has refused to oppose Smith in the past, which is weak, but he wouldn't actually actively try to help build Smith up, would he? Would he?). Yeah, Wyden has to support the Kennedy resolution...
Jan 21, '07
Nate, yes, Wyden would wisely and very responsibly work to build Smith up. There is also a reason why no big gun is yet stepping forward to challenge Smith's Senate seat. That will happen in the fullness of time.
Nobody posting here seems to have a glimmer yet about what lies ahead. Ron, Earl, Peter, Darlene & David not only do, but are cooperating.
Jan 21, '07
Stanley, you seem to be making my point for me, but I'll repeat it here for clarity:
given the absence of any Democratic challengers to Smith for the Senate, I read this as saying that a big fish is lurking in the water that has all of the small fry hiding in the shadows. Otherwise, it's difficult to explain how orchestrated it all seems that no one has declared.
I've said this many times before, but I still say it's Kitzhaber, who told me personally late last year that he'd wait until this summer to make up his mind.
12:27 p.m.
Jan 22, '07
Hey guys... I'm certainly not an insider's insider, but I've had a lot of conversations with a lot of people about candidates. So far, nobody's running.
All the more reason why we'll continue to make the case here at BlueOregon why Gordon should be defeated. If we show serious interest on the part of the grassroots, a fence-sitting candidate might jump in.
So far: DeFazio, Kitzhaber, Gardner have all personally said they're out. I take 'em at their word.
Jan 22, '07
Nate said:
This is actually kind of sad. The Biden resolution ... is a non-binding Sense of the Senate resolution which would have no legal standing and would be nothing more than mildly symbolic.
Yes. Like Wyden himself, this is merely mildly symbolic.
The one that actually has some teeth to it is the Kennedy resolution.
What? You almost had me, Nate. The Kennedy resolution is also merely mildly symbolic. It's the McGovern Amendment that would actually end the occupation and bring the troops home, allowing only funds for removal of the troops and reconstruction costs. The Woolsey, Lee and Waters proposal also seems to be legit.
Don't be fooled by this "surge" hoax. 20,000 troops will not change anything one way or the other. It only allows the right wings of both parties to claim that they are taking opposite positions.