Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Today's Dose

I will try to get as much of Harman’s public statements, interviews, speeches, and press releases covered here as possible. It’s a little surprising that Harman’s site has not really been a resource of information about the things the Congresswoman is saying, however, I hope to see that change. Today’s belated posting of the Huffington Post piece she did last week on her House site is a start.

Here’s what I came across at the Wikipedia page for Harman today. It’s a Harman quote from a December interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN:

I am not angry. It [the selection for House Intel Committee Chairperson] was her choice. Obviously, I had hoped to stay. I thought I'd earned it and that it had been promised. But I think Silvestre Reyes is an excellent choice. He has my support. I'm going to stay in the game on these issues. Here I am, Wolf. But I also think that her majority is created by moderates and conservatives who won in Republican seats who talk tough and smart on security issues. And I will help them stay in Congress and help keep our majority in 2008.
Emphasis added

Other exchanges with Harman from the same CNN appearance (all bolding is added by me):

BLITZER: .. Is it time, right now, for the U.S. to cut its losses and simply pull out of Iraq?

HARMAN: It's time to change the strategy. And the ISG report lays out a good baseline to change that strategy.

I'm from California, Wolf. And I think we had an earthquake on November 7 when the Republicans were removed from power over the Iraq and corruption issues.

There were two aftershocks. The first one was Rumsfeld leaving. And the second is this report. The fact that it's being shot at from the right and the left shows me that it's pretty sound.

Not every detail is sound. It leaves out energy independence. And I think it fails to notice that the reality on the ground is a partitioning of the country, which I think is OK. But it is time to change our strategy. "Stay the course" is dead.

About partitioning, later on she says that “what’s happening on the ground is partition. And that’s what the Iraqi’s seem to be wanting”. Voluntary partitioning? I can’t imagine those who are partitioned at gunpoint or under threat of rape or death are thinking too much about what they want.

And don’t you love that if people across the spectrum criticize something, then that must mean it’s good.

BLITZER: But you're willing to keep U.S. troops in Iraq, combat forces, for at least another year, whatever the cost, whatever the consequences?

HARMAN: No. I insist that we change the strategy. The report says we should embed troops and start moving our troops out. It doesn't set a firm timetable, except to say, in '08, they should be substantially out. Maybe that timetable should be shorter.

I don't know that I have enough information to say what it is. But I do know that the military mission to have large amounts of troops in Iraq to secure the country has failed and we have to change that strategy now.

OK, so Harman’s on board for maybe substantially moving our troops out earlier than 2008. No link handy, but I know that the drawdown the report called for when specific numbers were finally discussed would have pretty been modest (we’d still have 100,000 there) because the embedded forces would need protection. Was she not aware of this at the time?

Now that they're going to share the oil equitably -- or that's what they said yesterday -- I think that's a very healthy sign that this may be their choice for how to move...

Does she expect the Shia to come right out and admit they intend to give nothing to the Sunni, who control the oil-less middle section of the country? Giving any weight to statements like these is pretty gullible. Take off the rose-colored glasses please.


Harman issued press releases in favor of HR 1 to implement the 9/11 commission recommendations, and releases announcing her return to the House Energy & Commerce Committee.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home