A McGovern is on the trail stumping for Hillary Clinton ...no, not McGovern (George) the decent, thoughtful, anti-war (Vietnam, that is) Democrat who was served up like a sacrificial lamb against Richard Nixon in the 1972 election (though Hillary Clinton was a volunteer for that campaign, organizing voters in, of all places, Texas. Talk about a thankless job.)
I’m speaking about Massachusetts Congressman Jim McGovern who was in Portsmouth Thursday campaigning for Hillary Clinton.
When I asked why McGovern (who, interestingly, worked for Sen. George McGovern, no relation) was stumping for the New York Senator, he didn’t quibble and spoke like someone not happy about having had a front row view watching the Bush administration train wreck for more than six years -- “I want my country back.”
In particular, he’s fighting “with every ounce of being” to change course in Iraq which is one of the reasons he is supporting Clinton. McGovern has served the folks in the 3rd District of Massachusetts since 1997 (it includes Worcester and Fall River) told me he believes that Bush “dragged us into this misguided war” and that it may take Clinton “to bring this war to an end” beginning in January 2009. “She brings instant credibility and a special set of skills, talents and abilities” needed to recover from the Bush saga.
McGovern has been anti-war since before the actual shooting began (he voted against the war resolution in 2002) and said that electing Clinton would immediately be a positive step in restoring the country’s sagging international stature. He said he’s just returned from a trip to Africa and was impressed by how often “people asked about Hillary.” (Funny how they weren’t asking about George W. but I digress...)
McGovern called the Iraq war the biggest “moral, diplomatic, political and foreign policy” debacle in the country’s history and likely only to get worse the longer the U.S. involvement in the civil war goes on. “Our soldiers are doing an incredible job,” McGovern explained to me but the same can’t be said about the gang that runs the show — and seems almost fatalistically determined to create an even bigger disaster.
“We’re not cutting and running,” McGovern said about the standard Republican response to the growing anti-war community which includes a wide political range of McGovern’s constituents. “We are changing course because we don’t have a military option.”
McGovern, who did support the war in Afghanistan and supports sending more troops there, represents an interesting counter of the conventional wisdom from late 2006 by the wise guy and gal pundit herd -- that Clinton would have a difficult time winning over passionate anti-war Democrats who wouldn’t forgive her for voting in 2002 to give Bush crate blanche for war. While Clinton’s explanations about the rationale for that vote have been less than convincing — and she continues to fend off punches from Barack Obama about that vote -- I have yet to meet an anti-war Democrat in New Hampshire who said they wouldn’t support Clinton because of that vote. And I’ve talked to more than a few who are supporting her because they, like McGovern, believe she will turn the tide. Of course the same can be said of all the credible Democratic candidates. The mess today seems so daunting and tragic that the ability to get us out fast and safe while trying to salvage something out of the Iraq inferno -- where McGovern said the country’s “best and brightest” either has been killed or have fled into exile to save themselves -- will likely matter more than a vote in 2002.
ADVERTISEMENTS 
Comments
I used to know McGovern back when I was at the Standard Times. If I remember he represented Fall River. Barney Frank had New Bedford. Interesting to see him so vocal on the campaign trail. I don't recall him doing much to distinguish himself in his own congressional district.
FYI, it is ridiculously difficult posting comments to this blog.
Posted by: tester1![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.blogthecoast.com/primary/pundit/nav-commenters.gif)
|
August 10, 2007 08:23 PM