JIM WALSH (R-NY) RETIRING FROM CONGRESS-- THAT'S ABOUT TWO DOZEN SO FAR

Hey Jimmy, don't let the door hit you in the ass

Jim Walsh is one of those fake moderates the Republicans try passing off in moderate districts, like NY-25. His voting record is not moderate; it's very right-wing. And that's why he nearly lost his seat (51-49%) to Dan Maffei last year and why it was apparent that Dan was going to bury him in November and it's why he has decided not to even try again in 2008.

The Syracuse-based district voted against Bush in 2000 and 2004, voted for Hillary and will likely never give its votes to a Republican again-- at least not for a long, long time. Walsh may be a wingnut but he knew which was the wind was blowing. One look at his voting record-- violently anti-choice, anti-environment, anti-consumer, anti-labor-- in the light of what his constituents say they want, made it clear that he'd never win again. In this district which solidly opposes Bush's Iraq policies, Walsh has voted on Iraq-related legislation 60 times since cheering on the authorization to use force against Iraq on October 10, 2002. Despite the wishes of his constituents, he has been a complete rubber stamp for Bush and Cheney for the past 6 years. Last February he finally voted against the so-called surge-- after being barraged by furious constituents-- but immediately reverted to voting with the radical right on every single Iraq vote after that. Out of 60 votes, he managed to oppose Bush and Cheney once-- and then crawled back to them with his tail between his legs. Good riddance!

Last August Blue America endorsed Dan Maffei and we've been helping him raise money. 141 of our members have given so far. NY-25 is one of three seats Blue America plans on helping Democrats capturing in November. (The two others are Eric Massa in NY-29 and Jon Powers in NY-26.)


UPDATE: I GUESS WALSH WASN'T ONE OF THE MODERATES CQ WAS SPINNING ABOUT

I'm guessin' they wrote this silly, absurd Congressional Quarterly piece before Walsh's retirement story hit the wires last night.

For the first time in a while, some moderate House Republicans see a reason to be optimistic.

The centrists who survived the Democratic surge of 2006 see signs of hope when they look at their party’s presidential contest. To varying degrees, House GOP moderates feel kinship with Sen. John McCain of Arizona, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Give me a break. Even if they insist on referring to lock step right-wing congressional ideologues-- who have rubber stamped the entire Bush agenda-- as "moderates," how can anyone in their right mind listen to what's been spewing out from McCain's, Giuliani's and Willard's mouths and relate that to any kind of "moderation?"

By backing President Bush’s policy in Iraq, GOP leaders have made political survival difficult for Republican lawmakers representing swing districts. It didn’t help when the leadership took a hard line last year against Democratic efforts to provide more money than Bush wanted for domestic programs, including health insurance for poor children.

Well, guess what McCain, Giuliani and Willard are saying about those very issues. And if the fake moderates are all so optimistic, why are they all quitting and retiring at the fastest rate in congressional history?

PETRAEUS GETS SOME BAD REVIEWS AFTER PRESENTING THE BUSH REGIME'S LATEST STAY THE COURSE LINE

Bush's political general spent over half the past month flacking for the regime's odious and unpopular war escalation policies. He met with clowns like David Diapers Vitter (R-LA) and Chris Shays (R-CT), provided party-line propaganda ammo for far right lunatics such as James Inhofe (R-OK), Norm Coleman (R-MN), Bud Cramer (D-AL), Thelma Drake (R-VA), Jason Altmire (D-PA), and Doug Lamborn (R-CO), and chit chatted with countless journalists from... well, Australia.

Now he's on Capitol Hill trying to provide cover for the most hated president in history along with his discredited and disastrous policies. After his slick speech, meant more for razzle and dazzle using  questionable statistics than to actually shed any real light on how to remedy a tragic situation-- which, to be fair, should be the job on the incompetent nincompoop he works for-- Newsweek dismissed him as a smooth salesman whose wares are outmoded. The American public wasn't taken in and "Petraeus’s draw-down recommendations have outraged critics of the war who accuse him of merely doing Bush's bidding and adjusting his recommendations to the politics of the Hill." And, still, the hapless Bush counts on Petraeus not as a general so much as a Republican politician who knows how to take orders.

Let’s not mince words: David Petraeus may be the only thing standing between George W. Bush and total failure in Iraq. And it’s apparent that most of the Washington power elite-- as well as the rest of the country—understands that.

...But it's questionable whether even the smoothest-talking salesman could appease public opinion-- or Petraeus’s Pentagon detractors-- at this point. Newsweek has learned that a separate internal report being prepared by a Pentagon working group will “differ substantially” from Petraeus’s recommendations, according to an official who is privy to the ongoing discussions but would speak about them only on condition of anonymity. An early version of the report, which is currently being drafted and is expected to be completed by the beginning of next year, will “recommend a very rapid reduction in American forces: as much as two-thirds of the existing force very quickly, while keeping the remainder there.”

Last night David Letterman summed up Petraeus' credibility with a comment about Britney Spears' career-ending VMA performance: "General Petraeus thought it went quite well."
This morning's Washington Post took the sugar coating off Petraeus'-- and Bush's-- message that they want to see a U.S. military presense in Iraq for many years, something the vast majority of the American public does not support.

Members of Congress who are listening to their constituents were not sucked in. "The administration has sent you here today to convince [Congress]... that victory is at hand," Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos (Calif.) said in an opening statement. "With all due respect," he told Petraeus, "I don't buy it."

Last yesterday I spoke with Ron Shepston, the retired Air Force officer and Vietnam vet who is taking on rubber stamp Republican Gary Miller (CA-42) in a very Republican suburban Orange County/Inland Empire district, a district where Kerry only pulled 37% against Bush. But Ron insists that even in a district like the 42nd, people are sick and tired of Bush's lies and his bungling domestic policies and failed foreign policy. His approach to ending the war doesn't beat around any Bushes. He says our presense in Iraq is making a bad situation worse and he wants to see withdrawal begin immediately. Ron will be the Blue America guest this Saturday-- 11am, PT, on Firedoglake-- and I urge you to come over and ask him about his positions and why he thinks they will win even in such a partisan GOP area.

After speaking with Ron I started getting e-mails from numerous candidates who were not impressed with th Bush Regime's Petraeus dog and pony show. Kirsten Gillibrand, a Blue Dog who was endorsed by our PAC last year, and who now sits on the House Armed Services Committee, sounded very much in touch with how most Americans feel about this war.

The President’s stated goal of increasing troop levels in Iraq was to buy the Iraqi government some breathing room to make political gains. This did not happen. A recent GAO report on progress in Iraq shows the Iraqi government has failed to meet 15 of 18 benchmarks for success and a separate report from retired Marine General James Jones declared that Iraq is still far from being able to take over security responsibilities in Iraq.  The report also indicates that the Iraqi Interior Ministry which runs the security force is "dysfunctional" and recommends that the national police force be disbanded...
 
I also was taken by the sobering testimony of Ambassador Crocker when he stated, "There will be no single moment at which we can claim victory. Any turning point will likely only be recognized in retrospect…"
 
I respectfully disagree with General Petraeus’ recommendation to continue the surge through next summer. I believe a phased redeployment should start as soon as possible. Using a date certain phased redeployment provides America with its best leverage to force political progress in Iraq. We must hold Iraqi leaders accountable for their future. Even General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker acknowledged that our success in Anbar was due largely to the local war lords rejecting the strong arm tactics of Al Qaeda, taking security in their own hands, and kicking out Al Qaeda themselves.

The upstate New York district adjacent to Gillibrand's was also won by a Blue America-endorsed candidate last year, John Hall, who is not a Blue Dog and who we have endorsed again for 2008. While Kirsten's dismissal of the Bush Regime's plan to keep the war going might have surprised some, no one can be surprised by Congressman Hall's reaction to Petraeus' approach.

The hearing provided little in the way of new evidence and I believe we still need a firm timetable to wind down our involvement in Iraq.

We already knew American troops are very good at their jobs, so it should come as no surprise that as the have moved into neighborhoods, they have improved security. The escalation was designed to provide "breathing room" to Iraqi politicians to negotiate.

However, General Petraeus gave no new evidence that Iraqi forces are prepared to hold the gains American troops have made. And Ambassador Crocker seemed pessimistic that Iraqi politicians could take advantage of whatever small improvements have occurred.

When announcing his escalation, President Bush said we would see results in 6 months. Now, at the 6 month point, his two top officials in Iraq are unable to show any tangible signs of improvement and have asked for 6 more months. The American people don't want 6 more months of the same quagmire and I don't believe Congress should provide it.

General Petraeus's proposal of a troop reduction is merely a token withdrawal that covers only a very small portion of the 160,000 troops in Iraq. This withdrawal is being forced upon him because we don't have enough troops to replace the ones being rotated out of Iraq. He has offered to reduce troops not because the escalation is working, but because there are no fresh troops to replace them.

Another Democrat endorsed in 2006 and again this year-- who came close last year and is expected to win next year-- is Eric Massa a man with a long and distinguished career of military leadership. His opponent, a wishy-washy rubber stamp Republican named Randy Kuhl has never found a Bush-Cheney proposal on Iraq he couldn't support with his vote. This morning Eric, pointing out that while Petraeus was giving his testimony 9 more Americans were killed in Iraq, demanded Kuhl change course.

"It is clear after closely watching the testimony yesterday that the surge, which my opponent has wholeheartedly supported, even while being 'skeptical,' has failed... General Petraeus stated that our military must now hold the current troop surge level until next summer, but I remember reading an article in the Olean Times Herald in August of 2006 where my opponent suggested that we would start bringing the troops home by last Christmas. The conversation about Iraq has indeed taken a turn for the worse. Rather than having the conversation of 'did the surge work or not,' we are now discussing the impossible-- namely sustaining the enormous spike in our deployment that's been rapidly breaking our military for an additional year. We don't have the troops to do this and we simply cannot afford to spend anymore American lives on this three way civil war. The longer we stay, the worse it gets and I refuse to sit on the sidelines while American military personnel continue to pay the ultimate price for George Bush and Randy Kuhl's failed strategy in Iraq-– this while the Iraqi government goes on two month vacations."

"Last year when Randy Kuhl spent some 16 hours in Iraq, he told us that it's really quite pleasant in Baghdad with all the fabulous shopping and lobster for dinner. Kuhl also told us that we would start seeing troops home by the end of 2006, he then changed his web site to extend that for an additional year and now the Administration has extended that yet another year-– our seventh in Iraq.  Now I suspect that he'll change his language once again and back Petraeus' new plan of sustaining the surge and over extending our military indefinitely. Today, I call on Congressman Randy Kuhl to renounce his dark alliance as George Bush's Whip and stand up for our troops. I am not asking as his political opponent, I am asking as a Retired Naval Commander and an American. We cannot endure another Vietnam, and that is exactly where the Republicans are leading us. The time to change course is now, and if our leaders won't do what's right, then we will replace them next November.

Rep. Tom Allen is a Blue America-endorsed candidate running for the Senate against rudderless rubber stamp Republican Susan Collins, lately a protege of Joe Lieberman. Tom's clear and consistent record of supporting the fighting men and women while opposing Bush's misuse of them through his misguided policies, makes his statement after listening to Petraeus somewhat predictable. After all, Tom has been out on the campaign trail talking with everyday Mainers for the last several weeks and he knows how strongly they feel about ending this terrible war, even if his opponent is still clueless.

During my trip to Iraq last month, General Petraeus told me he believes our troops will be in Iraq in some form for nine or ten years. That is completely unacceptable. Today, General Petraeus recommended troop withdrawal to pre-surge levels and leaving 130,000 troops there. That, too, is completely unacceptable.

General Petraeus and President Bush are simply offering plans to continue the war. What we need is a plan to end it-- and that starts with setting a deadline for withdrawal. This is the only way to get the involved parties to resolve their differences.

Newly elected Colorado Congressman Ed Perlmutter, who handily defeated a pro-war extremist last year, called Petraeus' request to keep 130,000 soldiers in Iraq "simply unacceptable. After more than four years since the beginning of the war, we are no closer to ending our involvement and our military is stretched to the breaking point. It is time for a change in direction in Iraq."

If none of these reactions surprises you, how about rubber stamp Republicans, terrified about losing their seats next year, finally abandoning Bush and Cheney and calling for an end to the war? In 2004 the Democrats didn't even bother running someone against James Reynolds in NY-25. Last year ardent war opponent Dan Maffei came within 1% of beating him and this year Maffei is running again-- and looking like a big winner. Walsh has one of the most pro-war, aggressively rubber stamp voting records of anyone in Congress. Since October 10, 2002, there have been 54 Iraq-related votes. With one minor, non-binding exception Walsh could have gone to play golf, given Dick Cheney his proxy and told him to vote any way he'd like. It has been enablers like James Walsh who have allowed Bush to get away with his agenda of dishonesty and destruction for the last 7 years. And yet today the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle is reporting that even Walsh can no longer abide Bush's war agenda. Walsh "is switching gears and is now calling for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Not only that but Walsh, who visited Iraq during the weekend, says he will no longer support funding the war."

Walsh's record on Iraq has been extremely deceitful and it remains to be seen what he will actually do when it comes down to a vote. Few who have seen him in operation over the last half dozen years are willing to take him at face value since his rhetoric has never matched his actions in the past.

Rather than leave you with a statement from a slippery character like James Walsh, let me quote one of the most inspired reactions to Petraeus I've read so far, also from an upstate New York congressman. After Petraeus had spoken Maurice Hinchey (NY-22) was crystal clear: "The surge has failed."

The sad truth is that Iraq is a very volatile country; there are tragic levels of violence now and there will be tragic levels of violence whenever the United States leaves. However, the United States' presence in Iraq is not doing anything to quell the violence that already exists. For that reason, it's time to end the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

President Bush misled this country into invading Iraq and he has proven to be extraordinarily incompetent at managing the subsequent occupation. When President Bush said Iraq was connected to al Qaeda and the September 11 attacks he was deliberately wrong. When President Bush declared "mission accomplished" just six weeks after the invasion of Iraq he was foolishly wrong. When President Bush asked for time to let his so-called surge work he was wrong. Now that he is asking for more time to let his so-called surge work we are wise enough to know that he will be wrong again so we must step in and end the U.S. occupation of Iraq now. It is time for our troops to come home and to be redeployed to Afghanistan and other parts of the world where al Qaeda continues to lurk as a major threat to our national security. Not another American should die in Iraq.

Send a message.


UPDATE: EVEN A RIGHT WING HACK LIKE GEORGE WILL ADMITS BUSH'S IRAQ POLICIES HAVE FAILED; MAYBE HE'S PAYING ATTENTION TO RUSS FEINGOLD

Wow, even George Will! George Will has been one of the gaggle of Insider media hacks who have cheered Bush on from day one. But today... not so much. His 9/11 solumn starts with an explanation of how "the surge has failed, as measured by the president's and Petraeus' standards of success."

And who woulda thunk George Will would agree with Russ Feingold? Amidst a roomful of potted plants distinguished senators, Feingold let loose.

Mr. Chairman, it is simply tragic that, six years to the day after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, our attention is focused on what has been the greatest mistake in the fight against al Qaeda-– namely, the Iraq war. I strongly supported the decision to go to war in Afghanistan, which served as a sanctuary for al Qaeda. The war in Iraq has been a terrible diversion from Afghanistan, and what should be a global fight against a global enemy.

The war in Iraq has taken away resources-- particularly personnel and money-- that could be better spent fighting al Qaeda and its affiliates not just in Afghanistan but also in North Africa and Southeast Asia. It has reversed the outpouring of support and good will that emerged after 9/11, it has deepened instability throughout the Middle East, and it has resulted in the emergence of an Al Qaeda affiliate in Iraq that didn't exist before the war.

As this summer’s declassified NIE confirmed, Al Qaeda remains the most serious threat to the United States, and key elements of that threat have been regenerated or even enhanced. While our attention and resources have been focused on Iraq, Al Qaeda has protected its safe haven in Pakistan and increased cooperation with regional terrorist groups.

The question we must answer is not whether we are winning or losing in Iraq but whether Iraq is helping or hurting our efforts to defeat al Qaeda. That is the lesson of 9/11, and it’s a lesson we must remember today and every day.

BLUE AMERICA WELCOMES DAN MAFFEI-- WE WANT TO TAKE BACK THREE SEATS IN NEW YORK NEXT YEAR-- AND THIS IS ONE OF 'EM

Upstate New York has three districts that have been devastated by Bush's anti-union "Free Trade" extremism that all border on each other, that are all currently represented by a rubber stamp Republican in trouble and that each has an exceptional progressive Democrat running in-- NY-25, NY-26 and NY-29. We've discussed Jon Powers and Eric Massa before, and today we'll be meeting the third in their trio, Dan Maffei. The discussion starts at 2pm, EDT, at Firedoglake.

Dan came closer to anyone else in New York to dislodging a Republican incumbent other than the three who actually did (Mike Arcuri, John Hall and Kirstin Gillibrand). Less than 2% points seperated Dan and 10-term incumbent James Walsh (3,400 votes). 2008 will be Dan's turn. As you'll see when you meet him today, he sounds really good. But is he? I started our interview by asking him if he's going to take our donations and turn into another treacherous Bush Dog like Chris Carney, whose district isn't that far away. "No, I sure hope not," Dan told me. "I have a very different approach than he did. Political leadership is, in part, taking a position and bringing your constituents along with you. I'll be a good representative for this district because on all the key issues we see eye to eye. The stands I take-- for public financing of elections, for ending the occupation of Iraq, for Medicare for all-- aren't exactly profiles in courage positions. The people in the district support these things."

When Dan goes out and meets his neighbors and tells them he's running for Congress, he has a message he's trying to deliver. But so do they. I asked him what they tell him. "The Iraq War is #1, especially when you factor in other needs, like infrastructure costs, not being met because of all the resources being poured into Iraq." The voters want to talk with him about things we hear from candidates all over America, like education and jobs. But there is something else, something that inspired Dan to pick the Tom Petty song "I Won't Back Down," as his campaign theme song. "It goes beyond lost jobs in the manufacturing sector," Dan told me. "You can sense the regional lack of self-esteem. Children and other family members move away because of limited opportunities-- move away from this beautiful, liveable place with a quality of life second to none. Putting this area back on the map again has got to be a major priority. People need hope and a thriving economy with real jobs are a key to that."

Last year the Democratic Party establishment didn't much care about Dan's race against Walsh. In 2004 no Democrat had even bothered running against him and in 2002, when a Democrat did, Walsh picked up 72% of the vote. Yet the district is far from a right wing bastion. Kerry and Gore both took it as did Hillary Clinton when she ran for Senate. But the DCCC was too busy chasing Rahm Emanuel's dream of electing pro-war Bush Dogs to bother with NY-25. Dan managed to raise over $900,000 to get out his message (half of what Walsh spent) with no help from Washington until the very last minute when polls showed him within the margin of error of winning.

This year Dan has several advantages. Any of the Democratic frontrunners-- and especially NY Senator Hillary Clinton-- being at the top of the Democratic ticket will bring out thousands of extra voters, overwhelmingly voters who want a change. Last year no one had heard of Dan Maffei. Now everyone in the district has. This year he's already had more media coverage than in the entire 2006 campaign. The traditional media has so accustomed the electorate into believing the absurd hype that Walsh, a pure Bush rubber stamp, is somehow a "moderate," that's it's taken Dan all this time to help educate the electorate to understand his far right voting record, especially on Iraq. Of the 55 roll calls since the October 10, 2002 resolutions to authorize the use of force in Iraq Walsh has voted against the Bush agenda exactly one time, this year when he realized his re-election was in grave jeopardy.

Dan has a placard in his office with a quote from General Omar Bradley: "Now is the time when we've got to steer by the stars and not by the lights of every passing ship." A Congressman Maffei will be neither a Congressman Walsh nor a Congressman Carney. He's a man with a firm moral compass and who believes in the progressive values that are very much all-American values. Please feel free to ask him any questions you'd like. And if you like what you hear, also feel free to join me in giving his campaign a boost today at our Blue America page.