The Union Leader reported a few days ago that Congressman Paul Hodes faced a hostile audience of families whose sons and daughters have served in the Iraq War.
The article was the lead story in the newspaper ("War Families hit Hodes"), and described an encounter that seemed very emotional and one-sided. In fact, it seemed like the kind of meeting which makes everyone upset and rarely leads to progress.
Different families spoke at the same time. Hodes himself was constantly interrupted. Peggo Hodes was accused of taking notes when, in fact, she was writing her email address for a member of the group.
The sentiment of the meeting seem to be expressed by one family member whose son was killed in Afghanistan: "Can we sit by and watch the bloodbath after we pull out? Can we do that as a country? The fact of the matter is we've gone into this country. It is now in disarray, and it would be dishonorable of us to leave it as is and leave it to the wolves."
(In the interests of full disclosure, it should be noted that this family member is well-known Republican activist and a former candidate for the NH State Senate. The Union Leader failed to disclose this information. And a lot else about the attendees. Click here to learn more about them.)
The meeting, which lasted two hours and included 11 people in addition Paul and Peggo Hodes, clearly touched a nerve. Make that, two nerves.
Obviously this war is a gut-wrenching, emotional experiences to which I cannot begin to do justice with such a modest description. This meeting was not a debate about tax policy. It was about life and death, as well as freedom and tyranny, and it doesn't get more powerful than that.
But the other nerve this meeting touched is less obvious, and perhaps just as important.
We know there has an incredible gap between those who are making policy regarding the Iraq War and those who are serving in that conflict. Certainly that has been true throughout the Bush administration. One needs only to read about the two daughters of President Bush, who spend their post-graduate years partying in South America rather than fighting in Iraq to understand the extent of that disconnect.
Unfortunately, that gap has the potential to be even wider for Democrats, who now effectively share governance of the country.
As a Democrat, it helps if you are Patrick Murphy, the new Congressman from Pennsylvania who served in Iraq in the 82nd Airborne. Or Gabby Giffords of Arizona whose boyfriend is a NASA astronaut. Or if you are Jack Murtha of Pennsylvania, a longtime supporter of the military.
But if you are Paul Hodes and have not served in the military ever, it's a lot tougher. Especially when you are delivering the news that President W has refused deliver for years.
Here is the bitter medicine coming from DC: we're losing this war. And to make matters tougher, our presence is making the war in Iraq worse, not better.
Democrats like Paul Hodes have long recognized that the unfair and untrue perception of them as weak on national security issues. And when you have someone as honorable as Congressman Hodes, you have someone who is not going to play politics on this issue. He is going to talk to each voter in a direct and straight manner.
And while that is the right course, newspapers like the Union Leader like to exploit our Achilles Heal.
Here it is: not enough Democrats who oppose this war speak with to or know those familes whose loved ones are actually serving.
Say what you will about the Republicans (like the fact that they have exploited their relationship with military families in recent years -- witness the Walter Reed scandal, the failure to equip the troops properly, and the inhumane way (until recently) that soldiers killed in duty were transported back to the United States). At least they have a relationship.
It's a real problem for Democrats.
The good news is that help might be on the way. First, there are smart people like NH State Senator Maggie Hassen who really get this issue and have done outreach to military families throughout her district in quiet, small ways.
And there are people like Paul Hodes who listen to their constitutents, even if their opinion is different.
The other good news is that there is a national organization with whom I spoke recently who is working to further dialogue. This group gets a very important principle: left-wing progressives need to understand, and respect, the role the military plays in ensuring the thriving democracy known as the US of A.
This group will be holding bi-partisan working meetings in the coming months in key, early-primary states (like New Hampshire) to explore this issue in greater detail. But the bottom line is clear (at least to me): we Dems need to understand and respect and connect to military families and individuals 1000% more than we do now.
I deplore the smear campaign of The Union Leader with regards to the story this past weekend. At the same time, I recognize that anyone who opposes the war in Iraq ougth to make a concerted and consistent effort to meet, understand, and gain the trust of those families whose loved ones are serving in Iraq. We can't simply pay lip service and say, "we support the troops." We need to be there in good times and bad times, with those who might even oppose us politically, to let them know their service to country is respected and understood.
Congressman Paul Hodes met that standard last weekend. The rest of us need to do the same.
Comments