Monthly Archive for January, 2007

The holidays came late this year for the MN-GOP when Eric Black gave them a couple huge belated Christmas presents by completely missing the point of Norman Coleman’s fancy-pants political dance on Bush’s Iraq escalation plan.

The first came on the 19th of January, when Black took shots at the DFL (on his blog and in the Strib) for daring to suggest that Coleman was hedging on Bush’s escalation plan:

“The DFL says Coleman has flip-flopped on increasing troop levels; Coleman’s words have been consistent.”

The Star Tribune political team realized this had a less than intimate relationship with the crux of the story on Coleman’s backflip, so Kevin Diaz wrote:

“Coleman has come under sharp criticism from Minnesota DFLers for appearing to break from Bush’s war policy, but refusing to back up his words in deeds. He appeared to check those criticisms Monday afternoon by signing on to a proposal that Warner and other had been considering for the past five days.”

Then today, the AP finished linguistically smooshing Black’s simply inaccurate assertion that Coleman has been consistent (emphasis and image are mine):

“The Minnesota Republican sounded like the old longhaired anti-war activist in a speech two weeks ago when talking about President Bush’s plan to send 21,500 additional troops to Iraq: “I refuse to put more American lives on the line in Baghdad without being assured that the Iraqis themselves are willing to do what they need to do to end the violence of Iraqi against Iraqi.”

But Coleman wasn’t going as far as war opponents thought he was, as he soon expressed concerns that a nonbinding Senate resolution disapproving of the buildup went too far. Coleman said that while he opposed a troop buildup in Baghdad, he was not against sending more troops to other parts of Iraq, like the western Anbar province, where al-Qaida members are believed to be operating.

This week, he removed any doubt about his position by voting against the resolution in committee. Coleman has backed an alternative nonbinding resolution by Sen. John Warner, R-Va., which opposes Bush’s plan but leaves open the possibility that a small number of forces could be sent to Anbar province.”

Not surprisingly, Republican law students [one of whom, btw, took everyone to school on Almanac this Friday] kept the talking point alive, that the Star Tribune reported Coleman’s consistent position on escalation in Iraq, and those that think the fog surrounding the headlines and actual reporting of his position is the result of a mid-winter mixture of warm, muddy communication and the crisp cool air of journalism are simply shaking their fist at the moon.

Well I, for one, refuse to go quietly into the night:

“Coleman opposes troop surge” [Marshall Independent, 1/11/07].

ED HENRY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: This hour, the president right now is behind closed doors with a group of Republican lawmakers, including Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman. He’s one of those lawmakers who has come out against an increase of troops in Iraq. [January 17, 2007 Wednesday