{"id":1745,"date":"2007-12-04T13:03:22","date_gmt":"2007-12-04T18:03:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=1745"},"modified":"2007-12-04T13:03:22","modified_gmt":"2007-12-04T18:03:22","slug":"you-could-see-this-coming","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=1745","title":{"rendered":"You Could See This Coming"},"content":{"rendered":"

The other day, I sat in on a conference call with some people from the Norm Coleman campaign, as they rolled out their “Franken Flip-Flops On Iraq” video.<\/p>\n

And, having interviewed the Senator on this very subject in the past, I jumped one step ahead of the local Sorosphere; playing the devil’s advocate, I asked the campaign staffer “How would the Senator answer charges that he, himself, has held contradictory positions on the war?”<\/p>\n

The answer, of course…<\/p>\n

…well, we’ll get back to that.\u00a0 Because the counterspin has begun.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Minnesota’s most reliable DFL mouthpieces (except Lori Sturdevant), MNPublius, bring exactly the spin I predicted<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Today Norm Coleman did what any guy afraid of his own record on an issue does: attack the other guy for his record. Coleman is trying his darndest to turn people\u2019s attention away from his abysmal record on this war (he\u2019s gone so far as to convert the whole frontpage of his campaign site<\/font><\/a> to an ad for the webclip) that he\u2019s, apparently, taken to editing together disparate clips from Franken\u2019s past.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Let’s take a moment to make sure we’re clear, here; Coleman’s “abysmal record” has nothing to do with the complaints conservatives might have – about Coleman’s tepid stance on the surge, for example.\u00a0 The conservative complaints are misguided, in my opinion; while I think Coleman was wrong on the surge (he’s a Senator trying to influence operational decisions, which I think is a poor idea, albeit his right to try <\/em>as a citizen and legislator), he’s been strong on pretty much every other aspect of the war – including areas that much of the rest of\u00a0 Congress is afraid to touch, like Iran, the UN, and the fallout of the Oil for Food program.<\/p>\n

The closest Coleman’s come to a “flip flop” is his principled – and wrong – votes on the surge.\u00a0 Mistakes happen.\u00a0 I give him a “90”, and tell him to go forth and sin no more.<\/p>\n

So given that MNPublius is a reliable barometer of the “very-left-but-not-crazy<\/em>” wing of the DFL, let’s check out their defense of Franken:<\/p>\n

Alright, so, the first claim is that Franken has both supported and opposed a timeline for withdrawal but if you take a look at the record you\u2019ll find out (and I might point out that Franken hasn\u2019t attempted to hide this) that his position in favor of a timeline wasn\u2019t formed until late 2006. He has said repeatedly that he became convinced of the need for a timetable during the tumultuous year of 2006, with its waves of sectarian violence and the lack of political progress. He has since made a timeline part of his campaign platform on Iraq.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Now, I don’t necessarily look at “flip-flopping” – sometimes also known as “changing ones’ mind after a rational reappraisal” of something – as a bad thing.\u00a0 It’d be against interest, for starters.\u00a0\u00a0I “flip-flopped” on being a liberal, 20-odd years ago, after all.\u00a0 If humans didn’t reappraise things based on evolving knowledge and experience, our hands would all be covered with third-degree burns from the hot stoves we continue testing with our fingers, lest we “flip flop” on trusting our eyes.<\/p>\n

No, changing ones’ mind isn’t a bad thing.\u00a0 Changing ones’ mind from a smart stance to a dumb<\/em> one – like “giving the terrorists and militias a hard date when it’ll be safe to come out of the cellar and resume their depredations without fear of a US soldier putting a laser-guided missile up your rectum” – however, is.<\/p>\n

The second claim here is that Franken has held multiple positions on cutting off funding for the war. This one\u2019s pretty easy to debunk because the guy\u2019s always held the exact same position: that Congress should force the President to establish an exit strategy as a condition of further funding. If the President refused to do so, he would be \u201ccutting off the funding for the troops.\u201d Since that\u2019s not a move the President would make, it would force him to accept the terms of the funding \u2013 namely, withdrawal. Moreover, I think this is a plan that most Americans can and would support.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Leave aside that the latest polling shows otherwise (when in the echo chamber, it can take a while for the actual sound to change), that’d be another example of “changing ones’ mind to a stupid position”.<\/p>\n

Franken has acknowledged that he never spoke out against the war before it began, and he has acknowledged becoming a vocal critic of the war since. He\u2019s not afraid of his record but stands by it. Which is maybe why he doesn\u2019t feel the need to counterpoint the Coleman spin machine and is maybe why Coleman feels the need to throw these distractions out into the web. I mean, if you had Coleman\u2019s record would you do anything else?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The difference:<\/p>\n