War in Iraq Needs Debate Immediately

by Matt Brown for US Senate, Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 12:57:57 PM EST

In case you missed it, M. Charles Bakst of the Providence Journal Tuesday made a strong argument for what Matt Brown has been saying for months - the war in Iraq is one of the most critical issues facing our nation and we need our leaders to say where they stand.

This post has been crossblogged at Matt Brown's campaign blog.

That's why in August Brown was the first U.S. Senate candidate to call on President Bush to set a timetable to bring the troops home.  And why Brown challenged his opponent, Sheldon Whitehouse, to debate the war in Iraq.

Unfortunately, Whitehouse  has refused to discuss the issue.

Check out Bakst's column and let me know what you think about Brown's petition and why we need to debate the war in Iraq now.

Tags: (all tags)

  • 5 Comments
  • 0 recs
  • Share
  • Permalink

Comments

5 Comments

Shadow_head_small
i don't understand
what's the difference between whitehouse and your position?
by Matt Stoller 2005-12-08 01:04PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: i don't understand
Matt -

Good question.  It's pretty simple.  

In August, Brown became the first U.S. Senate candidate to call on President Bush to set a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq.  Brown wants the withdrawal to start after the December 15th Iraq national elections, with all of American troops home by the end of 2006.  More than 7,000 Rhode Islanders have supported Brown's petition calling on President Bush to set a timetable to bring our troops home.

Whitehouse has been all over the place regarding the war in Iraq.  Just last week, Whitehouse flipped his position position after polling Rhode Island voters.  What do I mean flipped?

For months, Whitehouse has opposed setting a timetable to withdraw American troops from Iraq.   In October Whitehouse said, "[b]y disclosing an exit strategy...U.S. leaders would be compromising troops' safety." [Brown Daily Herald]  

And in an article in the Providence Journal only a couple days ago, Whitehouse explained, "it would also be wrong for U.S. forces to leave too rapidly or on a fixed schedule."

Yet, the same day he released an internal poll, Whitehouse flipped his position, saying there should be a timetable to bring the troops home by the end of 2006.

Whitehouse has repeatedly refused to join Brown's challenge that they debate the war in Iraq and bringing the troops home.  Exactly why, we're not sure.  He has avoided many of the press calls regarding it or said that the issue could wait until an election year (as if the war in Iraq was simply a campaign issue without larger meaning.)

Is that clear enough?  I'd love to hear the blogging community's thoughts on why Whitehouse won't meet us for a debate.

by Matt Brown for US Senate 2005-12-08 02:04PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Also see
Today's article in the Providence Phoenix: "Whitehouse dodges debate on Iraq (for now)"
Read more here.
by Matt Brown for US Senate 2005-12-09 08:55AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
if you
think that netroots outreach is important, maybe it would be a good idea to actually have the candidate take a little time to blog himself
by yomoma2424 2005-12-08 06:28PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: if you
Matt blogs here and on our campaign blog, www.mattbrown.org.  He also posts a blog on Huffington Post.  We'll also be doing an interview with Jonathan Singer very soon.

What do you think about the idea to debate the war in Iraq?

by Matt Brown for US Senate 2005-12-09 06:58AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------