Coleman Putting Thumb to Political Winds

By Joe Bodell
Friday, December 22, 2006 at 11:53 am

In politics, it’s okay to hold a position for a time, then alter that position as more facts and circumstances arise which challenge you to re-apply your values to the situation.  That’s called rational analysis, and it’s a good thing. 

It’s another thing altogether to blow with the political breezes every time a difficult political situation arises.  That’s not such a good thing. In May of 2003, former-DFLer-but-now-a-Republican Senator Norm Coleman had 28 war protesters forcibly removed from his St. Paul office when they would not leave voluntarily.  He later asked that charges against the protestors be dropped:

“The protesters were simply wrong,” Coleman said in a prepared statement. “With the discovery of mass graves, the welcoming of American forces when Baghdad was liberated and the fact that thousands of American soldiers were not killed…it’s clear that those who protested America’s position on this matter were wrong.”

Back then, of course, Minnsota was high on the Republican Party’s list of Senate targets, and a litany of Republican scandals on Capitol Hill had not yet come to fruition.  What changed between then and the December 20th edition of the Star Tribune?

In a conference call with reporters from Bahrain, Coleman said he would “stand against” any effort for a “surge” of troops in Baghdad, unless there’s a clear vision that it will help end sectarian violence in the city.

Prompted by Bush’s comments that the United States is neither winning nor losing the war in Iraq, Coleman said, “We’re not winning because Iraq is tearing itself apart.” The United States can’t be successful until Iraqis find resolution in Baghdad, he said. Coleman said violence in that city is beyond comprehension.

Since there is no such “clear vision”, we must assume this means Coleman will stand against the so-called “surge” of troops to Iraq.  So did the protesters stop being wrong and start being right about the war?  Or did the political winds in Minnesota simply shift once again for Norm Coleman?

Edited to correct the date of the protest

Categories & Tags: |

Comments

2 Comments

Randy
Comment posted December 22, 2006 @ 3:55 pm

You don’t need a weatherman . . . If it were practically any other politician, I would see this as an honest change–or evolution–in thinking.  Senator Coleman, however, has a well-documented history of, shall we say, adapting himself to the changing political circumstances.  There is no way of telling what his real position on Iraq is.  All that really matters is how he votes when something comes before the Senate.  Talk is cheap, but votes matter.


Randy
Comment posted December 22, 2006 @ 9:55 am

You don't need a weatherman . . . If it were practically any other politician, I would see this as an honest change–or evolution–in thinking.  Senator Coleman, however, has a well-documented history of, shall we say, adapting himself to the changing political circumstances.  There is no way of telling what his real position on Iraq is.  All that really matters is how he votes when something comes before the Senate.  Talk is cheap, but votes matter.


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.