Posted on 12/28/2005 10:45:48 AM PST by neverdem
War experience touted for Dems. Veterans for a Secure America fields candidates for Congress nationwide, including two in Colorado.
More than 30 Iraq and Persian Gulf War veterans have entered congressional races across the country as Democrats, hoping to capitalize on their military experience to topple the incumbent Republican majority.
In Colorado, two former military men, Jay Fawcett and Bill Winter, are vying for the House seats of two strong, entrenched Republicans: Rep. Joel Hefley of the 5th Congressional District and Rep. Tom Tancredo of the 6th Congressional District, respectively.
"Do we understand military and foreign affairs? You bet," Fawcett said. "Most of us have been to the point where you get a direct dose of military and foreign affairs, mostly in the category of small-caliber weapons. But we understand that that is just one aspect of national policy."
On Dec. 20, Fawcett and Winter joined 35 Democratic veterans running for Congress at a strategy session in Washington, D.C.
The veterans voted on a name for their emerging caucuslike campaign coalition: Veterans for a Secure America. They also agreed that their military backgrounds should be promoted as credentials for leadership across the full spectrum of public policy, said Fawcett, an Air Force veteran of the 1991 Gulf War who has taught at the Air Force Academy and now works as a consultant to Northern Command in Colorado Springs.
The group will reconvene in Washington in February to respond to President Bush's State of the Union address in a news conference on the steps of the Capitol, Winter said. An attorney and the former president of the grassroots liberal organizing group Be The Change, Winter spent 10 peacetime years in the Marine Corps and the Navy.
Fawcett said the group is not anti-war but is concerned about what appears to be a lack of a solid plan for the war in Iraq. He said the group's military experience could be crucial in providing better leadership.
The war in Iraq, which polls show is now unpopular with most Americans, is a growing political weakness for Bush and for Republican lawmakers, Democratic strategists say. As proof, they point to the experience last summer of Paul Hackett, an Iraq war veteran who narrowly lost a congressional bid in a solidly Republican district in Ohio. Hackett now is running for Senate.
"Iraq is in the eye of the beholder in many ways, but increasingly, the public is viewing it negatively," said Rick Ridder, a Democratic consultant in Denver. "I certainly think there is a greater momentum now among (Democratic) veterans, after Hackett did so well in a predominantly Republican district."
But Republicans are confident they can maintain their traditional strength among voters focused on the military and veterans' issues, said Carl Forti of the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee, which recruits Republican candidates across the country.
"People may not like the war, but they still believe that Republicans will do a better job of protecting them than Democrats," Forti said. "And if Democrats want to try to make an issue of the war and security, especially Democrats who have a voting record - they have an abysmal voting record on defense spending."
At least two military veterans have entered congressional races as Republicans, one of them a veteran of the Iraq war, Forti said.
If Democrats think they can create a winning election-year theme with veterans as candidates, they are wrong, Forti said.
"They have two major problems: Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean," he said.
Pelosi, the Democratic House minority leader from California, wants the U.S. to pull out of Iraq. Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, recently said the U.S. would not prevail there. Both are unpopular positions, Forti said.
"These are Democrats who happen to be military veterans who are running for Congress," he said of Veterans for Security. "It's one résumé item. Just because you are a military guy doesn't make you a congressman."
Forti's counterparts at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee are not actively recruiting military veterans, spokeswoman Sarah Steinberg said.
"They absolutely serve a very good contrast against Republicans," she said. "But in every district, our goal is to recruit the best possible candidate we can."
In Colorado, both Fawcett and Winter are likely to face uphill battles against the Republican incumbents.
Hefley, who has not said yet whether he will seek re-election, has been elected to represent his heavily Republican district nine times before. And Tancredo is on a roll, Winter acknowledged, having emerged as a national conservative leader in the push to change immigration laws.
Staff writer Jim Hughes can be reached at 303-820-1244 or jhughes@denverpost.com.
I nominate that for THE question of this thread (but would add modern before Democrat).
Well, it worked for Kerry...hope they follow in his footsteps...
This is a real confounding trend.
Agreed. Why would a vet want to be a member of the party that is doing the most to stab the fighting men in the back?
perhaps this is a return to an older definition of democrat? one where democrat is not synonymous with socialist?
Bump.
I think the Rats want the House because that is where Impeachments begin!
The Dems are purposely recruiting Vets because they know that the military is their achilles heal. I'm not sure why the GOP has not done the same. Of course, the GOP should be trying to recruit the best people, without regard to their military service. But I'm not sure they are even doing that. They certainly don't seem to be very successful at it in any event.
Would like a position statement from each of these folks regarding the War in Iraq....NOW!
Don't think that's possible any longer. I'd guess they want their healthcare and prescription entitlements guaranteed more than anything else, and this is just a vote-gaining ploy.
I wonder if it is due to their own free will or are there other forces involved. In usually form, the Democrats don't have a plan for anything, including the Iraq war. They simply attack the plans of Republicans. With 30 veterans running, they can sit quietly and "it's implied" that they have the credentials to lead. The military officer core is solidly Republican, which explains why it's the best. In short, something smells fishy.
Its not a bad idea....
If you are a vet and a Dimwit, this is a perceived way to win an election. It won't work as stupid Dimwit ideas have proven unpopular.
And they're Dems?
They're going to have trouble getting support from within their own party. Do you really expect peace activist Dean to help you out?
Very well said......you bet me by 3 minutes.
"These are Democrats who happen to be military veterans who are running for Congress," he said of Veterans for Security. "It's one résumé item. Just because you are a military guy doesn't make you a congressman."
That would be pre-FDR? But be careful, if you go back too far they were pro-slavery.
They were pro-Jim Crow right into the 60s.
I'd like to know the opinions of men who served with these democRAT veterans.
Any Republican facing these "veterans" needs to point to articles like this one to show that their opponent is a part of a cynical ploy by the National Democrat Party to take over the House of Representatives so that they can promote "agenda" like American defeat in Iraq, the destruction of traditional marriage, higher taxes, turning the War on Terror over to Left Wing judges, unrestricted illegal immigration, etc. The Republican candidate should make the point that the National Democrats believe that his constituents are so stupid, and mindlessly "patriotic", that they will vote for anyone who has ever worn a military uniform, regardless of what views he/she espouses, or what the potential impact would be if the Democrats regained the leadership of the House.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.