Blatant Reality

After actually going to Iraq and seeing the progress going on there, Representative Baird now opposes plans for a withdrawal timeline.

The Washington Democrat, who voted against the Iraq war resolution in 2002, now opposes a timeline for withdrawal of U.S. troops from that country.

 

Anti-war constituents at a town hall meeting Monday night repeatedly questioned Baird’s reasons for supporting the Bush administration’s decision to continue the “surge” of 30,000 additional troops at least until next spring.

 

“There is only one way to end an illegal and immoral war, and that’s to end it,” said Zamme Joi, an anti-war activist from Vancouver. Joi was among several activists who noted that they helped elect Baird to office in 1998 and continued to re-elect him in a congressional district that twice voted for President Bush. They called his position to support the war now a betrayal.

 

In May, Baird supported a bill that would have required troop levels to start falling by Oct. 1. But his perspective changed after a visit to Iraq in early August.

 

He now opposes a withdrawal timeline — and said he thinks that most of the country agrees with him.

Now some people may see this as a flip-flop, but I think it takes a lot of guts to stand up to the anti-war protesters. Since he has actually been to Iraq and has talked to the leaders over there, he should know a lot better than protesters what is actually going on. Because he has been a strong opponent of the war from the beginning, it should speak wonders that he thinks that now we should stay as long as it is needed because we have “a moral responsibility to the Iraqi people.” As long as he doesn’t flip flop back to supporting withdrawal timelines, I think that I won’t mind having some respect for this guy.