Oh, Boyda: Kansas Congresswoman Walks out on General’s Positive Iraq Testimony
How Will Old Media Cover Kansas Congresswoman’s Keane Testimony Temper Tantrum?
______________________________________
Update, July 31: We have an answer — “‘Oh, Boyda’ Follow-up: National Media Complies with Congresswoman’s Plea Not to Cover General’s Positive Iraq Testimony — Or Her Tantrum Over It”
The original post follows.
______________________________________
From the Gavel — At a House Armed Services Committee Hearing on Iraq Legislation this morning on Friday, Kansas Congresswoman Nancy Borda apparently heard as much good news as she could stand.
So she did the old cut-and-run by walking out (as The Gavel explains, “She is responding in part to General Jack Keane, who testified before the Committee but left before Rep. Boyda’s remarks, and was reportedly one of the architects of the escalation policy”; there should probably be a “from” before the second mention of Keane’s name):
“I was certainly hoping that General Keane would be able to be here as well. Let me say thank you very much for your testimony so much, Mr. Korb, and I just will make some statements more for the record based on what I heard mainly General Keane. As many of us, there was only so much that you could take until we, in fact, had to leave the room for a while, and so I think I am back and maybe can articulate some things that after so much of the frustration of having to listen to what we listened to.”
“But let me just first say that the description of Iraq as if some way or another that it’s a place that I might take the family for a vacation, things are going so well, those kinds of comments will in fact show up in the media and further divide this country instead of saying here’s the reality of the problem and people, we have to come together and deal with the reality of this issue.”
Note that she:
- Is almost certainly mischaracterizing the general’s testimony — unless someone can find Iraq described by the general as a suitable family vacation destination (good luck).
- Is afraid of positive news becoming known (this would appear to be a smoke signal to Old Media to ignore this testimony).
- Is, in effect, calling an multi-star general a liar, even though he was likely under oath.
- By walking out on a general’s testimony, is showing that SHE is more interested in keeping opinion on Iraq divided than getting at the truth.
But she supports the troops. (/sarcasm)
Let’s visit her campaign web site’s home page, shall we? Going to the last paragraph:
Now our challenge is to turn the promise of our campaign into action in Congress. Kansans cast their ballots on Election Day to end the era of one-party rule, so I am working every day in Washington to replace partisanship with leadership.
Nancy Boyda’s (possibly contrived?) hearing cut-and-run act was surely not an example of leadership.
From a Google cache of her “issues” page during her 2006 campaign (TEXT IS THERE — just click on “Foreign Policy” to see the text; backup stored here in case Ms. Boyda has Google cache scrubbed [July 28, 2008 - it was scrubbed]):
“Stay the course” is a political slogan, not a military strategy.
The administration must establish a responsible, realistic plan for dealing with the insurgency and a timeline during which the Iraqi citizens must establish a viable government for themselves.
So the administration has refined its plan, and a general comes in to explain how it’s going, in part to see if it meets Ms. Boyda’s “responsible, realistic” criteria. Apparently, Boyda’s definitions of “responsible” and “realistic” never encompassed “improving the situation in Iraq”; in fact, it seems that she can’t even handle the idea that the situation might be improving. Her expressed fears that good news might actually be reported would seem to betray a wish on her part that the mission fail, and her belief that good news testified to by a multi-star general, probably under oath, shouldn’t get out.
In light of her veiled plea to Old Media to ignore Keane’s testimony, will be interesting indeed to see how Old Media will play the testimony and Ms. Boyda’s snit fit, or whether it will bother to cover either.
Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.











But, but…I thought the Democrats said we should listen to the generals! Hm, I guess they didn’t really mean that.
Comment by someguy — July 30, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
Having listened to the entire hearing, let’s just say that it’s even worse than you think. This hearing was about a Dem bill to hamstring the admin with responsibilities for signing off on each deployment that doesn’t do every i and cross every t on “dwell times” and time between deployments. Dems are pretending to be looking out for the troops when they are really trying to force draw-downs of personnel in Iraq (and, BTW ONLY in Iraq).
That said, there were items in Keane’s testimony that were disturbing, and even bigger-picture ones, the most obvious of which is that we are STILL paying the price for the regular military-force reductions of the 1990s and the lack of will to build it back up, partially because people like Rumsfeld and others didn’t think it was necessary. Even if he thought we had enough soldiers in Iraq (and Keane in his testimony said even this was wrong), Rumsfeld STILL should have supported rebuilding total regular forces to support two-theatre contingencies, which we were last able to support in the early 1990s, and didn’t. Bad move — we have, as a result, relied on the Guard more than we should have.
Comment by TBlumer — July 31, 2007 @ 1:42 am
Ah yes, “end of one-party rule” in Washington. I think she means she wishes to end two-party governance in Washington. Having to negotiate with Republicans for anything is apparently just too frustrating to be endured.
Comment by Assistant Village Idiot — July 31, 2007 @ 11:19 am
[...] Click the image, select the second clip in the sidebar, and fast forward to 3:20 to watch. To his credit, Clyburn does go on to say that “none of us want to see a bad result in Iraq.” That’s a lie but a well meaning one. When you’re done, go read Bizzy Blog and see how Nancy Boyda dealt with her own case of cognitive dissonance. [...]
Pingback by Hot Air » Blog Archive » Clyburn: It would be a “real big problem for us” if Petraeus’s progress report is good — July 31, 2007 @ 11:30 am
[...] Click the here, select the second clip in the sidebar, and fast forward to 3:20 to watch. To his credit, Clyburn does go on to say that “none of us want to see a bad result in Iraq.†That’s a lie but a well meaning one. When you’re done, go read Bizzy Blog and see how Nancy Boyda dealt with her own case of cognitive dissonance. [...]
Pingback by Right Voices » Blog Archive » Democratic Kansas Congresswoman Nancy Borda Walks out on General’s Positive Iraq Testimony While Democratic Senator James Clyburn Says “It would be a “real big problem for us — July 31, 2007 @ 7:46 pm