News Darcy Burner on Petraeus. Kind of.
posted by September 26 at 14:31 PMon
The GOP sent out a press release today pressuring Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner to say how she would have voted on the resolutions that have come before Congress condemning MoveOn.org’s “Betray Us” ad in the NYT about General Petraeus.
I’ve linked the whole release below, but here’s state GOP chair Luke Esser’s quote:
“Darcy Burner has a responsibility to condemn her allies for bringing the politics of personal destruction to our military personnel,” said Washington State Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser. “Voters deserve to know whether she’d stand with the majority of her party or extremists like Jim McDermott. Darcy Burner would rather avoid offending her far-left allies than keep her promise to respect the men and women of our military.”
Given that most of our delegation has voted on this (Sen. Murray ‘Nay,’ Sen. Cantwell didn’t vote, Reps. Inslee and McDermott ‘Nay’ and everyone else, including Rep. Dave Reichert, whom Burner is challenging, in favor), I think it’s a fair question to throw Burner’s way. How would she have voted? Gotta take votes if you’re in Congress.
I put the question to her campaign spokesman, Sandeep Kaushik, and here’s what he said:
“Look, her dad is a veteran. Her husband is a veteran. And her brother just got back from Iraq. No one has more respect for the military than Darcy does. Obviously she has a lot of respect for General Petraeus. But there are two things going on here. The Bush Administration has put him in an untenable situation, asking him to find a military solution to a situation that doesn’t have a military solution. And second, the GOP is manufacturing a kind of situational outrage over what really is just an ad in a newspaper to distract people from the question at hand: How do we end this war?”
I asked again: How would Burner have voted?
Kaushik said: “Darcy has a lot of respect for General Petraeus and the difficult job he’s trying to do. And she’s not a fan of name-calling on either side.”
Not an answer. So I asked if I could ask Burner directly. Kaushik said Burner is out of town and “I think we’ll just leave it at that.”
I also talked to GOP spokesperson Josh Kahn about the issue. He said the left shouldn’t politicize military personnel like Gen. Petraeus. That seems hypocritical to me, given that Bush politicized Petraeus all summer—dodging anti-war criticism by hiding behind the pending Petraeus report.
FOUR WA DEMS CONDEMN MOVEON, BURNER STILL SILENT
Tukwila, WA… Four of Washington’s Democratic congressional delegation members, Representatives Baird, Dicks, Larsen and Smith, voted to condemn MoveOn.org today but Congressional candidate Darcy Burner has remained silent. Burner is a favorite of the extremist left-wing bloggers who have largely applauded MoveOn.org’s actions.
The House passed the resolution, which praised General Petraeus and condemned MoveOn.org’s “Betray Us” ad, with an overwhelmingly bipartisan 341-79 vote. Representatives Jay Inslee and Jim McDermott opposed the bill and neither of Washington’s two Senators supported the companion resolution in the Senate.
One of the House’s most liberal members, Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-WI), voted in favor of the resolution and said that members of Congress are obligated to criticize their allies when they go too far. ''I've got an obligation to be equally upset when that kind of juvenile debate emanates from the left.” (via AP, link)
“Darcy Burner has a responsibility to condemn her allies for brining the politics of personal destruction to our military personnel,” said Washington State Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser. “Voters deserve to know whether she’d stand with the majority of her party or extremists like Jim McDermott. Darcy Burner would rather avoid offending her far-left allies than keep her promise to respect the men and women of our military.”