Standing Fast

Thanks Bob. While most pundits and bloggers are talking about this as another notch on Shrum's belt of bad advice and questioning Edwards's political judgement, I think we should see this as something more. It’s an indictment of the whole "Fighting Faith", Scoop Jackson school of militarist liberalism that led a lot of Democrats who should have known better to buy into ne-conservative foreign policy and support Bush’s Iraq war. According to the Peter Beinarts (on the historical and ideological side) and Bob Shrums (on the pollster side) of the world, voters stop trusting the Democrats not because most Americans are instinctively conservative but because they are seen as weak on national defense. Therefore liberals need to role up their sleeves and show they aren't Michael Moore style "softs" afraid to unleash the U.S military in the struggle against radical Islam. You would have a hard time finding a Democrat who opposed using military force to get the Taliban to turn over Osama Bin Laden, but back in 2002 that was not good enough for some. To prove your military hardness you had to sign up whole-hog for Bush's "war on terror".

Political arguments aside there was an another immediate reason why Democrats who should have know better-particularly those considering a Presidential run-felt pressure to support Bush’s war. In 1991 the majority of Democrats opposed the first Gulf War, fearing a repeat of Vietnam. According to a Washington Post article about the 91 Congressional vote to give President H.W. Bush the authority to use military force against Saadam Hussein’s occupation of Kuwait:

While accurately describing how our current Iraq conflict turned out, the first Gulf War turned out to be short, successful and very low in American casualties. President George H.W Bush’s popularity soared to unheard of heights while those Democrats with Presidential ambitions who opposed the conflict, particularly centrist Georgia Senator Sam Nunn, saw their Oval Office dreams fade.

Too many Democrats were scared to death of another Gulf War backlash to vote against Bush’s 2002 resolution, including sadly Sen. Kerry who had spoken so eloquently over a decade ago.

For someone like Beinart who originally supported the Iraq war, this was keeping in the best traditions of Harry Truman liberalism as opposed to the “peacenik” McGovernite wing that supposedly is responsible for the decline of the Democratic Party. I’d call it morally reprehensible not to mention politically dumb. It didn’t prove to voters that Democrats were tougher on national security, and it got us stuck in the mess we’re in now. And while the Senator from South Dakota was unable to profit from being proven politically and morally right on Vietnam, most Democrats are now tripping over each other to show they support ending the conflict in Iraq. Of course Beinart also changed his mind too, but that is kind of like admitting the Titanic is unsinkable while standing in four feet of water.

Liberals aren’t pacifists. There are times sadly when military force is the only option available. Even McGovern advocated military force to rescue American hostages during the Iranian hostage crisis. And we can’t be naïve about the enemies we face. There are forces in the world that do want to do harm to our country and its citizens and they must be stopped; even by our imperfect government with its imperfect foreign policy record. But mindless playing with military rhetoric as a political cover against voter backlash is what got us into both this mess and Vietnam. Toughness does not mean throwing ones principles, or common sense for that matter, over board. And fighting terrorism means much more than military muscle; it means economic aid and development to build up unstable nations and supporting democratic movements in the struggle to build their own future, even if those movements fall short of our exact ideal. Democracies very rarely follow the back of someone else's tank. Shrum’s own admitted bad advice is another reason why Democrats need throw out the consultants and pollsters, not too mention the Peter Beinarts, and start standing on their own two feet again.