Lost in the pre and post-election analysis out of Massachusetts has been the major policy differences between Martha Coakley and Scott Brown over foreign policy and defense. The issue garnered some attention briefly during their final debate, when Coakley erred saying terrorists “were gone from Afghanistan.” But then the attentions of the media quickly turned back to the health care debate.
In campaigning with Brown in the final days, Rudy Giuliani mapped out the battle lines: “This election will send a signal, and a very dramatic one, that we are going in the wrong direction on terrorism, and we need to change it, and change it now.” Giuliani added: Scott’s background in the military speaks volumes about his understanding of what we face. And frankly his opponent’s ignorance about the issues facing us is astounding.”
From the start candidate Brown was unequivocal on defense matters. A 30-year Veteran of the National Guard, still serving as a lt. colonel, Brown unashamedly backed the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s notable that not once did he seek to separate himself from the Bush foreign policy agenda.
He repeatedly criticized his opponent, an attorney general, for her support of Obama’s policy of trying Khalid Sheikh Muhammed in a civilian trial in New York City.
Scott Brown refusted to back away from allowing the CIA and the Military to use strong interrogation techniques, including water-boarding, after being accused of supporting “torture” by Coakley and her supporters.
In contrast, candidate Coakley took a Ron Paul almost isolationist view on foreign policy.
Coakley called for a complete and immediate pull-out of Afghanistan:
“I think we have done what we are going to be able to do in Afghanistan. I think that we should plan an exit strategy. Yes. I’m not sure there is a way to succeed.”
Coakley on her campaign website, like Paul, took a straight Anti-War in Iraq stance:
“Had Martha been in the Senate at the time, she would have voted against the Iraq invasion. It is now crucial that American troops leave the country.
Martha supports President Obama’s plan to fully withdraw from Iraq…”
I served as Congressman Ron Paul’s Senior Aide from 1997 to 2003. I can remember his early noises made to his policy advisor circle immediately after the 9/11 attacks, not to vote for the resolution to go into Afghanistan. He finally relented after much pressure from the district, and even his staff. It was his decision in 2003 not to back the President Bush and the War in Iraq that finally led to my resignation.
Looking back, with the Iraqi people fully liberated, and a stable pro-American democracy developing, we can see that George W. Bush and Rudy Giuliani were right. Ron Paul got it wrong.
Perhaps Massachusetts voters sensed that Coakley’s Ron Paul-esque approach to fighting Islamic terrorism was rather weak like Paul’s. Perhaps the seriousness of the terrorism issue, came back to the fore in the minds of these voters, after the shocking Ft. Hood shooting, followed by the Christmas Day bomber.
Yes, health care was front and center. But it is notable that voters of one of the most dove-ish of states, chose to side forthrightly with the candidate of the Bush foreign policy agenda, over Obama/Paul.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.