There was a town hall meeting held by NY-25's Democratic challenger for the Congressional seat currently held by Congressman James Walsh.
The crowd at the town hall meeting at the OnCenter on Tuesday
Photos by Jude Nagurney Camwell
There was a town hall meeting held at the OnCenter yesterday that had been scheduled so that House majority leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) could attend, but inclement weather in the midwest made it impossible for him to be in Syracuse at 11:15 on this particular Tuesday morning. Dan Maffei, James Walsh's challenger for the NY-25 Congressional seat in 2008, standing alone confidently in front of about 150 people with a phone and a microphone, joked that the weather is always perfect in Syracuse.
In a press release on Monday, Congressman Jim Walsh labeled the Oncenter event as "The Out of Towners Town Hall Meeting." Most of the people in attendance didn't seem to care as much that Majority Leader Hoyer was unable to get there as they were to have their voices heard. The problem I think the public has had with Congressman Walsh is that he failed to hear them for over four years. When it became politically expedient for him to have to listen, he conceded to being present at town hall meetings. The jury is out as to whether or not he's actually listening now.
At the OnCenter, town hall meeting attendees got to hear (if not see) Majority Leader Hoyer talk about the Iraq war debate, as he sees it. He referred audience members to NY Times columnist Thomas Friedman's recent column that explains his fear that "the surge is trying to protect a unified Iraq that exists only in the imagination " I say this with all due respect to Mr. Friedman, a writer of whom I think has many sound ideas and a hopeful outlook about democracy, human rights, and freedom . I've witnessed his gradual philosophical metamorphosis on the realities on the ground in Iraq and, like many in our mainstream media, I believe that, all along, he has given too much benefit of the doubt to leaders who took us all for a misleading ride. Public opinion has gotten out in front of Mr. Friedman on Iraq and people who were once called "angry" and "leftists" are now a cross-section of the majority of average Americans who want to see our troops come home the right way.
Mr. Friedman still seems confused and hesitant in his analysis. I find it to be very late in the proverbial day to remain confused about what our commander-in-chief needs to do. Mr. Friedman says,
If I saw something with my own eyes that I hadn't seen before -- Iraq's Shiite, Kurdish and Sunni leaders stepping forward, declaring their willingness to work out their differences by a set deadline and publicly asking us to stay until they do. That's the only thing worth giving more time to develop.
But it may just be too late.
Speaking of "more time to develop", I got a chance to ask a question (quoted below in this article), but it only scratched the surface of what I would have loved to have said. The political clock in Washington D.C. has wound down to zero. The Baghdad clock is still a ticking time bomb with years to go.
The only person who can make a difference in the direction of the Iraq war is the person who controls the overall U.S. strategy in the region. That person is the Commander-in-chief, George W. Bush.
I believe that the crushing failure of the Republican majority members in both the House and Senate, for four years, to be critical thinkers and responsible statesman on Iraq is politically unforgiveable. They've acted as a rubber stamp for the wrong strategy as their constituents have cried out for change. They've fastidiously supported a conglomeration of talking points that have served only to guard their partisan gates, shutting out any public plea for reason.
Today, more than ever, we need real American leadership rather than leading by sending men and women in uniform into combat while pretending the debate is still about the false choices of "staying the course" or "changing direction."
After five years of pursuing a strategy that has been damaging to our nation and to our military, we need to reengage and reshape the international institutions that provide the framework for the global economy. We need to address the problems of mankind that are too big for any one nation to handle, such as poverty, disease, global warming, the prevention of war, and the protection of human rights.
We can't do these things until we find a way out of Iraq; the right way; partisan politics aside.
General Wesley Clark, a guest at the recent Yearly Kos conference in Chicago, has said,
"... we have to get out the right way, because unlike Vietnam, when we leave Iraq, we'll still be left with significant interests in the region. We'll still have concerns about Iranian nuclear potential, the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, our friends in the Arab Gulf, and yes, the security of the world's principal supply of oil. These interests won't go away simply by pulling U.S. troops out. Over the next few weeks, there will much discussion over the September report on Iraq, and General Dave Petraeus will be at the center of the debate. I admire [General] Dave Petraeus. He's doing his best to make the surge work. That's his duty, and I think you can see by the results that where you put American troops, they do their duty, and of course, they make a difference. Unfortunately, it's transitory, and at what cost?
James Walsh is waiting...for what?
Congressman Walsh told a crowd at a town hall meeting earlier this month that he doesn't believe the Iraq war can be won militarily. He says that he wants to see a political solution - for Iraqi leaders meet to discuss and iron out their issues. Walsh said that he knows that the majority of his constituents wants our troops out of Iraq, but it's "not that simple."
The September report from General Petraeus
I asked a question yesterday at the town hall meeting. It probably seemed more like a blogpost than a concise question, but I believe that our leaders' focus on the Iraq debate may be misplaced:
My Question
I recently read an article by Andrew Bacevich (professor of history and international relations at Boston University), who lost his son, Andrew Bacevich Jr. (a soldier) in Iraq. In the article, it says that in the Iraq war there are two clocks. One is driven by domestic politics and the other is connected to real events in Baghdad. The Washington DC clock has ticked down faster than the Baghdad clock. The last 5 years have shown no satisfactory political progress in Baghdad and President Bush has squandered every opportunity to build an interested and effective international coalition. Republicans enjoyed a four-year majority while abdicating their responsibility to the People by acting as a rubber stamp for the Bush administration.
We voted for change in 2006.
We meant what we voted for.
When will this President and Congressman Walsh come clean with an anxious and waiting American public and admit the truth - that the time to implement the strategy that General Petraeus has set out to put in place does not exist?
Appearances, appearances...
I read on a related article at News10Now that, "for the hall, the crowd seemed small" and I wondered if a tiny, crowded room at a firehouse or labor hall would have pleased the reporter more than the open, plush surroundings at Syracuse's lovely OnCenter. Then again, I wondered, is it the reporter's job to editorialize on such matters? The size of the crowd at the Marcellus fire station assembled for Mr. Walsh's town hall meeting earlier this month was virtually the same, and James Walsh is the incumbent.
Hear this NPR Story on the Walsh townhall meeting earlier this month The NPR reporter gives Mr. Walsh credit for trying to explain the differences between the tribes and sects in the region, yet I would challenge him to explain to his constituents exactly who the Iraqi government is and who they represent at any given moment. The national assembly of Iraq, currently with no Sunni representation, that is allegedly relying on our troops to allow them to function is in constant sectarian flux.
Why are we looking to General Petraeus when he doesn't set policy in the region?
We shouldn't be arguing over the troops or their tactics. Instead, we should be raising the debate to the Bush administration's strategies and policies in this region. They've been wrong from the start.
Congressman Michael Arcuri (NY District 24) appeared at the townhall meeting and read a passage from The Art of War by Sun Tzu. (see below)
When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of
the State will not be equal to the strain. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor damped, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue.
- From The Art of War, Chapter II - Waging War
See a posting at Dan Maffei's campaign website blog by Louis Kriesberg, Maxwell Professor Emeritus of Social Conflict Studies, Syracuse University, suggesting the need for vigorous Congressional action as a crucial element in the process of changing U.S. foreign policy.
<r>
Postal employee Joe Frega asks a question with his concerns about the privatization of the U.S. Postal Service
Cross-posted at the Rational Liberal/Syracuse.com