ANOTHER 100 YEARS IN IRAQ? McCAIN ISN'T THE ONLY REPUBLICAN WHO LIKES THE IDEA

There were several reasons Paul Hodes defeated entrenched Republican incumbent Congressman Charlie Bass in 2006, but mostly it was because Bass had lost touch with New Hampshire voters. Seeking to represent a Republican Party more and more in the thrall of narrow-minded religionist loons in the South, to corporate interests and, most insidiously, to an authoritarian and bumbling Bush regime, while forgetting the hopes and aspirations of his constituents, Bass became an outsider in his own district. Yesterday he announced he is supporting John McCain for president. John McCain who, along with Joe Lieberman, is so war-crazed that he has publicly declared he is willing to occupy Iraq for 100 years. Does Charlie Bass want to see Americans dying in Iraq-- and watch our country slip into bankruptcy in the process-- for 100 years? Maybe-- but the citizens of New Hampshire clearly do not.

The same question must be asked of scores of Republican legislators who are supporting McCain's bid to, in effect, extend the hated Bush Regime by another four years. According to Roll Call there are 29 current members of Congress who support McCain's candidacy. Each of their constituents should ask themselves if their senator or representative really thinks the best policy for this country is to be fighting in Iraq for another 100 years. Before I get to one very special case, here's the full list of the McCain War Party:

Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan.)
Sen. Richard Burr (N.C.)
Sen. Susan Collins (Maine)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.)
Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.)
Sen. Joe Lieberman (IND-Conn.)
Sen. Gordon Smith (Ore.)
Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine)
Sen. John Thune (S.D.)
Sen. John Warner (Va.)
Rep. Spencer Bachus (Ala.)
Rep. Mike Castle (Del.)
Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (Fla.)
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (Fla.)
Rep. Jeff Flake (Ariz.)
Rep. Ric Keller (Fla.)
Rep. Mark Kirk (Ill.)
Rep. Ray LaHood (Ill.)
Rep. Steven LaTourette (Ohio)
Rep. Dan Lungren (Calif.)
Rep. Chip Pickering (Miss.)
Rep. Todd Platts (Pa.)
Rep. Rick Renzi (Ariz.)
Rep. Peter Roskam (Ill.)
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Fla.)
Rep. John Shadegg (Ariz.)
Rep. Christopher Shays (Conn.)
Rep. John Shimkus (Ill.)
Rep. Fred Upton (Mich.)

Chris Shays ought to be particularly vulnerable for his support of McCain. I think Connecticut voters have had enough treachery from politicians running for office on one plank who, within moments of election, switch positions to something far less palatable to voters. Connecticut votes need think only of how badly they were taken in by the treacherous Joe Lieberman in 2006. Shays says he opposes the war, but his own voting record and his diehard support for war maniacs McCain and Lieberman tell a very different story.

There is a similar dynamic in Maine, where rubber-stamp Republican Susan Collins has tried pulling the wool over the eyes of Maine voters with her protestations of "independence." Yet there are few senators who are more supportive of Lieberman and McCain and their Iraq policies than Collins. She was quick to jump in and endorse McCain. Does Susan Collins think that Maine voters want U.S. troops in Iraq for 100 years?

Gerald at Turn Maine Blue blogs on fluff piece the Portland Press Herald ran on Collins.

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine sharpened the distinction with her opponent in this year's election, Rep. Tom Allen, noting on Thursday that she remains opposed to any deadlines for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

Collins has been less willing than fellow Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe and Democratic Reps. Allen and Michael Michaud to criticize President Bush's handling of the war and support legislation requiring the withdrawal of troops by a certain date.

Collins and Lieberman have worked in tandem to prevent any meaningful investigation into the grotesque mismanagement and malfeasance that has characterized the reconstruction efforts in Iraq. Maine voters should ask themselves why-- and why they are tolerating a senator who is behind an Iraq policy most of them oppose.

If you've got any spare change around that you'd like to put into stopping the deceitful swine like McCain, Lieberman, Collins or any of the others who are willing to see Americans dying in Iraq for 100 years, please visit our Blue America page and consider helping out Collins' opponent, Tom Allen (who is one of only half a dozen members of Congress to never have bent to Bush's demands on anything), and to other anti-war stalwarts like Shays' opponent Jim Himes, as well as to Democrats willing to go up against their party's collaborationalist Establishment (think about the treacherous Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer)-- real fighters who need help for fast-approaching primaries: John Laesch, Donna Edwards, Mark Pera...


UPDATE: JIM HIMES NOTICED TOO

My friend Charles in Connecticut sent me Jim Himes' statement about Shays decision to join McCain and Lieberman on the campaign trail in New Hampshire:

Jim Himes responded today to Rep. Chris Shays' decision to campaign in New Hampshire for John McCain, who said yesterday said it is "fine with me" if the U.S. military stays in Iraq for "maybe a hundred years." The clip can be viewed here.

"Instead of campaigning enthusiastically for a Presidential candidate who is comfortable keeping our troops in Iraq for another 100 years, Chris Shays should remember his election promise to support timelines for troop withdrawal and turn his focus to the real needs of families here in our district. Families around the 4th District are struggling with skyrocketing fuel bills, high housing costs, inadequate health care, and transportation and education systems that desperately need attention.

"Chris Shays has spent the last five years stubbornly supporting President Bush's disastrous policies in Iraq. As soon as he returned to Washington last year, Chris Shays should have gotten to work for the people of the district and kept his election promise to support timelines to bring our troops home from Iraq. Instead, he voted with Bush to send even more troops to Iraq, then voted against timelines again and again, while shifting his proposed withdrawal date from 2007 to 2008 and now 2010. Next month, Chris Shays will probably return from his 20th trip to Iraq with his 20th different position on when our troops should come home.

"We cannot afford the lives lost or destroyed or the billions of dollars per week currently being spent to keep troops in Iraq indefinitely. After 20 years in Washington, Chris Shays should be focused on the priorities here at home that he has neglected for too long, not on campaigning in New Hampshire or packing for his next trip to Baghdad."

#