BY MIKE CETERA
UPDATE: Jan. 11
Here's what I learned during this newspaper's editorial board endorsement session Tuesday with Democrats in the 14th Congressional District: If the Dems are looking for an Obama-like figure here, they may find themselves disappointed.
The session with Bill Foster, John Laesch and Jotham Stein was an exercise in wonk-speak, which isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to discussing issues of importance. Indeed, all three men were well armed with facts and figures to support their positions, a noted departure from some past Democratic candidates seeking this office.
Still, none of the candidates appears to possess the charm that is part of the appeal some voters see in Barack Obama. Laesch is the closest in framing his populist message, but he sometimes has a hard time clarifying his positions, while Foster is much more affable and even humorous in relaxed moments than during debates and interviews. Stein talks very fast and can't seem to boil his message down (he insists he has the most detailed platform of any of the candidates), and instead repeatedly refers questioners to his Web site for more details.
The Democrats, much like the Republicans in this race, share some basic beliefs. This means that no matter which candidates emerge from the primary, we're guaranteed to see a matchup of two men with vastly different views on American government.
The Democratic candidates all support a withdrawal of troops from Iraq. They all support increasing border security, though none of them seem married to specific plans. They all support a "path to citizenship" for the illegal immigrants already here. And they all think No Child Left Behind has been a failed experiment.
There were no real surprises during the endorsement session, although I found Laesch's inability to clearly explain his position on use of military force frustrating. Laesch, the only veteran in the 14th Congressional District race, said he opposes "pre-emptive war in general." I still can't figure out at what threshold of provocation Laesch would support military action, despite several questions and his attempts to clarify. Maybe it's me.
UPDATE: Jan. 11
Laesch's campaign sent further clarification on John's position. You can find it here.
The question should have been posed, have we learned from this administration. We are deep into this preemptive war with Iraq which has cost us 4000 American soldiers lives, thousands of wounded, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, and billions of dollars. This administration has continually attempted to get us into a preemptive war with Iraq, that each of the other two Democrats has stated they would not be opposed to. John Laesch said not so fast and that was before the National Intelligence Estimate came out. The brightest of our intelligence community learned from what the Bush administration did in Iraq and how they perverted the intelligence an outright lied before with Iraq and made sure the information came out so he could not do what they did before. Now the Bush administration has a new tactic and showing this video of the encounter with the Iranian ships. If you speak with anyone in the Navy stationed in that region, John included, you will find that this is a common occurrence that this type of activity happens all the time it has been going on for years. So maybe instead of having a policy of preemptive war we should learn a lesson from the current administration and try real diplomacy first before we go bombing the hell out of other countries. This does NOT mean that we should not defend this country and no one has ever said that we do not and should not defend our country but we need to learn from our mistakes and how about the question about preemptive diplomacy. It might work.
As a follow up to my comment above might I suggest that to put the concept of preemptive diplomacy in perspective you read "Madeline Albright: Memo to the President Elect" and the damage the concept of a preemptive war can cause. Again, my question when do you use preemptive diplomacy?
"John Laesch said not so fast ...."
When I think of John Laesch, I think not so fast too.
Mike, thanks for your personal views on this process. The more I learn, the better informed my voting decision will be.
Appreciate the cador for the Dems and Republicans. Looking forward to the endorsements.
PS...The Trib videotaped their editorial session. Maybe next go-around the Beacon can blog, videotape or otherwise let us into this session so we too can get a real sense of the candidates.
CETERA RESPONDS:
Rob,
Thanks for the kind words. We, too, videotaped the editorial sessions. Look to the Beacon Web site on Sunday for a package of clips from those sessions.
Thank you Mike, for posting the update from Laesch.
You're right, Laesch is very wonky- but he sure does makes sense.