Senator Akaka and Representative Ed Case made a “joint appearance” at a luncheon today, hosted by the Hawaii Publishers Association. There was a bit of attention paid, as this is the only thing approaching a “debate” that has occured in the race for the Democratic Senate nomination.
They each spoke for about 15 to 20 minutes. Then the audience was allowed to ask questions. Apparently, everybody but me. I stood clearly, well lit, in the center of the room, rasing my hand each time they were ready for another question and was constantly ignored in favor of other questioners. (There is no way that this was a random oversight.)
To me, Ed’s speech was incredibly self-serving and abrasive. But that’s Ed. He has always been more impressed with himself than he has ever impressed me.
Ed made the claim that Senator Akaka has “been rated as the most liberal Senator.” While that statement is technically “true”– the National Journal DID rate Akaka the “most liberal” Senator in 2004– that was an atypical year. For 2005, the most recent ranking by the NJ (ARE YOU LISTENING, ED?), 22 Senators were rated as more liberal than Akaka, one tied, and 20 Senators rated as less liberal than Akaka. To my mind, that puts Akaka right in the “mainstream” of Senate Democrats. And the 2005 ranking accords with ratings from other years.
So, Ed is deliberately misleading people through his selective, cherrypicking of the evidence. (No wonder he thought the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld case for War in Iraq was legitimate!) Technically, it is not a “lie”, but he IS consciously choosing to be dishonest.
As part of his stump speech, Ed attempts to portray Senator Akaka’s views as those of the “fringe,” of the political “extreme.” WOW! His main evidence of this is Akaka’s vote for the Kerry resolution calling upon Congress to set a deadline for the Bush Adminsistration to bring the troops home from Iraq.
The commercial media are giving Ed a free pass on this one. The GOP, in both the U.S.House and Senate, have refused to allow for a free debate on Iraq and have only allowed resolutions to be voted upon that are most likely to expose Democrats to criticism at home. We can agree or disagree about the wisdom of setting a “date certain” for withdrawal– I go back and forth on THAT specific question myself. But on the BASIC question: Should we stay in Iraq until the “mission is completed” or “Should we be looking for a way to disengage from Iraq?,” the American people, and I would venture, the people of Hawaii are in favor of “getting out.”
Ed’s position is to “stay the course” and “complete the mission,” but nobody in the press has “pressed” him on what that might mean. How long should we stay, Ed? What benchmarks should we use to judge whether the situation is getting better or worse? And, by the way, shouldn’t the burden of proof be on the advocates of death and destruction that their plan is likely to make things better, than upon those of us calling for an end to the killing? Or is my headscrewed on wrong?
Ed frequently criticizes critics of the war for possessing a “dangerous naivete.” Excuse me, Ed, but YOU are the one who foolishly trusted George Bush, Dick Chene, Don Rumsfeld and Condi Rice and supported the beginning of the war at a time when Akaka, Inouye, Abvercrombie and Patsy ALL warned that the war would be a mistake. Who was being “naive” then?
And Ed continues his incredible “naivete” by continuing to trust the Bush gang to somehow solve the increasingly complex situation in Iraq, even while it spreads out of control across the Middle East! Ed wants to “stay the course” but why is it that nobody in the press points out to him that Bush, etc., will be running this war for the next 2 and a half years and what gives him confidence in their abilities to do a better job than the abortion they have created so far?
I will leave it to others to decide if he is truly being naively “misled” by the Bush crowd, or if his political opportunism is dictating his stance on the desirability of mass and unending violence.
A final point: Case constantly drones on about how Akaka won’t debate him and he sounds half-credible in his complaint. Except that Case does NOT want voters to have a chance to thoroughly compare the positions of the two candidates. A “debate” is ONE way of allowing for comparison, but it is also extremely useful to post your positions on the issues on your campaign website in order to allow voters to review, and compare, your positions.
Ed has consciously refused to do this. Some reporters are assuming this is an oversight. Bullshit. This is part of his strategy. Go to his website and see what he is saying this campaign is about. Here is what you will find: “Akaka won’t debate!” “Ed is young, has a good head of hair, is energetic and has a good-looking family.” “It is time for a transition!” And, 3rd-party articles claiming that Akaka and the Dems are “out-of-touch” and/ or ineffective.
Except for a laundry list of grandiose public relations phrases that Ed terms his “Agenda for a Better America,” there is virtually NO discussion of issues. Contrary to his kvetch about “no debate,” Ed does not want voters to focus on the issues, because ED loses if voters actually consider where he stands on the issues. Akaka’s values and positions are more in synch with Hawaii voters than Ed’s neo-liberal/neo-conservative melange. What appeals to voters about Ed is his energy, his youth and his appearance of intelligence. A “debate” would highlight those aspects of Ed. But “issues”? No.
So Ed is refusing to issue a “written” contract with prospective voters. He wants voters to focus on his “independence” from the “corrupt Democratic political culture” and not notice how often he has aligned himself with the Bush adminsitration on a wide range of issues. To the extent that the battle is framed as a struggle against the Hawaii “Democratic machine,” Ed will benefit. To the extent that the election is framed as a struggle against the national Bush agenda, Ed will lose.
A discussion of the “issues” is NOT to Ed’s advantage.
Go to Ed’s website, to see for yourselves:edcase.com
Then go to Akaka’s:Akaka2006.org
My post here is pretty scattered, but I am angry at Case, annoyed at the pro-Case orientation of the press, and in a hurry for a friend’s wedding.
-Bart
![[PDA - Heathcare NOT Warfare - Sign the Petition.]](http://pdamerica.org/images/ads/HealthNotWar_final.jpg)