i get all sorts of emails from all sorts--well, not ALL sorts--of political types. this one came today from ed fallon, who has decided to take on leonard boswell, our congressman, in the upcoming primary. boswell is old school: labor-endorsed, long-standing democratic credentials and all that. turns out he's less of a loyalist than we deserve, however. ed's point is that, plus the fact that [assuming that bill and hillary don't completely fuck up our chances in the fall] boswell does have a limited shelf life, and now might be a good time to get a new democrat in his seat, before the tides of favor shift, and a newer, fresher republican face comes along to knock boswell off his perch. good reasoning, i think. however, i have been pissed at ed since 2000, when he endorsed ralph nader over al gore. this press release addresses this still-raw point of contention. i guess, compared to boswell's on-going cardinal sin of voting [like clinton and many others] to authorize dubya's little war and to continue to fund it, ed's sin is the classic six of one and half-dozen of the other. if ed had discouraged ralph in 2000, leonard wouldn't have had to fail to do his job and actually READ the intelligence reports that outlined the specious cheney/rumsfeld/bush logic and reasoning demanding the invasion to find the non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
not only did i not endorse ralph nader in 2000 or 2004, i was a charter member of the nevada high school corvair club, circa 1969-1971. i have never supported nor voted for either the authroization to invade nor to continue funding bush's folly. therefore, i am more qualified than both fallon and boswell. but i don't want to run for congress--at this time. so i think i'm leaning toward supporting ed.
here's what he had to say today:
Dear friends:
This was released to the media today but I also wanted to share it with you.
Fallon to Boswell: "Stop negative attacks and stick to the issues."
Today, Ed Fallon again challenged his opponent, Leonard Boswell, to end his negative attacks and stick to the issues.
"Iowans want campaigns focused on issues and facts, not innuendo and negativity," said Fallon. "Unfortunately, Congressman Boswell's campaign is opting for the latter, with allegations that I am a 'bad' Democrat and even unethical. People are sick of this stuff. Let's have an open, fact-based discussion of the real issues."
Over the years, Fallon has apologized repeatedly for his 'Nader mistake.'"During the past 15 years, I have campaigned for dozens of progressive Democrats, and in 2004, I wrote to Ralph Nader asking him not to run for president. Yes, my support for Nader in 2000 was a mistake," said Fallon. "But what about Congressman Boswell's mistakes, such as voting for funding for the Iraq War repeatedly, for the PATRIOT Act, for warrantless surveillance, for a punitive bankruptcy bill, for tax breaks for oil and gas companies? On these and so many other issues Leonard Boswell has voted against Democratic priorities, the very priorities that I have fought for these past 20 years. If he feels those votes were mistakes, then let's have an apology. If he feels they were right, then let's have a debate."
A recent e-mail sent by Boswell's campaign also alleged that Fallon has acted unethically in his work with I'M for Iowa. "That's absurd," said Fallon. "I'M for Iowa is simply an organization that enables me to consult with activist across the state on a wide range of issues."
"Every campaign I've ever run has been run without PAC and lobbyist money. The focus of my life has been to live simply so I can devote my time and energy to advocating for people in need. Just as Republicans attacked John Kerry in 2004 for his military service, Boswell is trying to attack me on my strength as a fighter for clean, accountable government."
Fallon concluded, saying, "The Democratic Party is changing. New energy at the grassroots promises to restore true democratic principles to our government. I've got a lot of energy and passion for reform - including campaign finance, health care, and the environment - and I'm eager to put my commitment to public service to work in Washington, DC." Thank you,
Ed Fallon, Democrat for Congress
not only did i not endorse ralph nader in 2000 or 2004, i was a charter member of the nevada high school corvair club, circa 1969-1971. i have never supported nor voted for either the authroization to invade nor to continue funding bush's folly. therefore, i am more qualified than both fallon and boswell. but i don't want to run for congress--at this time. so i think i'm leaning toward supporting ed.
here's what he had to say today:
Dear friends:
This was released to the media today but I also wanted to share it with you.
Fallon to Boswell: "Stop negative attacks and stick to the issues."
Today, Ed Fallon again challenged his opponent, Leonard Boswell, to end his negative attacks and stick to the issues.
"Iowans want campaigns focused on issues and facts, not innuendo and negativity," said Fallon. "Unfortunately, Congressman Boswell's campaign is opting for the latter, with allegations that I am a 'bad' Democrat and even unethical. People are sick of this stuff. Let's have an open, fact-based discussion of the real issues."
Over the years, Fallon has apologized repeatedly for his 'Nader mistake.'"During the past 15 years, I have campaigned for dozens of progressive Democrats, and in 2004, I wrote to Ralph Nader asking him not to run for president. Yes, my support for Nader in 2000 was a mistake," said Fallon. "But what about Congressman Boswell's mistakes, such as voting for funding for the Iraq War repeatedly, for the PATRIOT Act, for warrantless surveillance, for a punitive bankruptcy bill, for tax breaks for oil and gas companies? On these and so many other issues Leonard Boswell has voted against Democratic priorities, the very priorities that I have fought for these past 20 years. If he feels those votes were mistakes, then let's have an apology. If he feels they were right, then let's have a debate."
A recent e-mail sent by Boswell's campaign also alleged that Fallon has acted unethically in his work with I'M for Iowa. "That's absurd," said Fallon. "I'M for Iowa is simply an organization that enables me to consult with activist across the state on a wide range of issues."
"Every campaign I've ever run has been run without PAC and lobbyist money. The focus of my life has been to live simply so I can devote my time and energy to advocating for people in need. Just as Republicans attacked John Kerry in 2004 for his military service, Boswell is trying to attack me on my strength as a fighter for clean, accountable government."
Fallon concluded, saying, "The Democratic Party is changing. New energy at the grassroots promises to restore true democratic principles to our government. I've got a lot of energy and passion for reform - including campaign finance, health care, and the environment - and I'm eager to put my commitment to public service to work in Washington, DC." Thank you,
Ed Fallon, Democrat for Congress
works for me, ed. thanks for writing.
7 comments:
I was the president of the nevada high school corvair club, red 65 two dr. 4 speed and a blue 67 auto (on the dash) slow 2 dr.
actually not sure on the years, but positive on color and speeds.
there are 2 active HS members in this upcoming grad. class.
Jerome
Hmmph... If we were to hold every candidate's least desirable quality up as the yardstick, we'd all be in trouble. So we'll let Ed have his Nader vote, ill-conceived as it may have been - and the impact of Nader can never fully be measured - and look forward. Ed's a genuine, hard working good-guy. I agree it's time for a new, independent thinking candidate to uproot Boswell and his toe-the-line voting record. And if we can get someone to bump Steve King off his medievil soapbox here in IA, we'll really be in good shape. Democrats should be licking their chops to battle this crackpot. Republicans, too, if they were smart.
Jed
Ed was the blue ribbon recipient at the Iowa State Fair accordion competition. A little accordion is a good thing, no?
Keith B
I must continue to defend Naders right to run and thus anyones right to endorse him. Recently, I believe on NPR, I heard that more Dems voted for Bush in 2000 than for Nader. I support his right to run wholeheartedly so I dont much care if this is fact or rumor but I thought that you, dear Kim, might. So do the research and report back for me, will ya? Then explain to me again why you are so pissed at Nader for exercising his rights as a citizen and reconcile that with your well known strong beliefs in the democratic process.
that seems like a lot of work, g pick.
i've said before that for a 3d party to be truly effective, there needs to be a groundswell, a movement of widespread support, or else they do more harm than good to the notion of a true 3d party being established.
george wallace in the 60s and 70s, for example, for better or worse, based his candidacy on the old south racist attitudes still open and prevalent. that goofy little ross perot had a movement going, too. but ralph's thing is based on his own perceived need to run, and nothing more. his could be the ego party. ron paul could do a better and more legitimate 3d party effort that nader.
oh, hell, he can run, sure, but he's setting back the concept of a third party ever taking hold, which i think could be a good thing, frankly. but folks just won't take it seriously with nader being the poster child.
regarding the number of dems voting for bush versus nader: doesn't matter. the fact is that he drained enough votes from gore to tip florida and, i think, ohio, to bush, and hence the election, and therefore, my eternal ire. there's always going to be cross-party voting, but nader gave the presidency to bush, plain and simple.
i'm very happy for you, jason; mom always said to spend it all in one place.
could you show me how to put hyperlinks into MY comments?
Kim, Nader was part of a movement, that is why he got votes. The movement is called being fed up with the status quo, which is the two parties we have. Someday, I have a dream, a viable 3rd party will emerge in this country and then we will hopefully see legitimate compromise on issues that move everyone forward rather than silly posturing moves that say I'm tough on this and you are wussy on that when really all they care about is staying in power.
Now you mention the way the states of Florida and Ohio play out and that speaks to the issue of our nations curious notion of democracy with bizarre voting practices and rules in place to disenfranchise, well, everyone. I am all for that debate and I think you should pursue it rather than continually calling Nader a stinky poopy head.
Post a Comment