The Washington Post reports that Tim Kaine has been chosen to deliver the Democratic rebuttal to the State of the Union address.
Despite the fact that I am a Kaine supporter, and worked hard for his election in November, I am not happy about this choice. It’s not about Kaine. The Post’s analysis of the reason behind the choice is below, but it’s not entirely correct:
Kaine, who won a tight election to become Virginia’s 70th governor in November, is seen as a rising star in the Democratic Party. He won convincingly in a conservative state and he campaigned as a fiscal conservative and spoke frequently about the importance of his faith.
For national Democrats, those messages are attractive as both parties head toward the mid-term elections later this year.
In the wake of the congressional lobbying scandals, Democrats are attempting to capitalize on what they call a culture of corruption in the Republican-controlled Congress. That makes it appealing to turn to an outside-the-Beltway governor, rather than a member of Congress, for the response to Bush’s speech this month.
I heard about this possibility in early December from some fellow Virginia Democrats. The rumor was that Kaine was being considered because, as a state governor, he would not have to discuss the Iraq war at all, and congressional Democrats – who are at odds with one another whether to support the war or not – would not have to choose someone from one faction or the other to speak.
This is a complete and utter cop-out. There are a lot of issues that ought to be discussed, but the Iraq war is one of the largest.
The situation isn’t all bad. If Bush brings up the racist ‘immigration’ BS, then Tim Kaine can and will shoot him down. But in my mind this is not a good enough substitute for a reasoned criticism of the Bush administration’s Iraq policy. And I am appalled that instead of confronting this issue, the Democrats in congress are too busy chasing their tails.
