« NM-02: Teague Up First in District With TV Ads | Main | House Repub "ROMP" Initiative Targets NM-01 Race »

Monday, April 07, 2008

NM-03: Wiviott on Iraq - New Ad, New Questions

All of our Congressional races are obviously heating up, as you can surmise from my posts today about candidate ads. We're now less than two month's away from the June 3rd primary and early voting starts in May. Don Wiviott was the first Congressional candidate up with TV ads in late February. Now he has a new one focused on the Iraq occupation that accompanies his demand that tough questions be asked about military progress in Iraq and how we can bring our troops home. In the ad Wiviott says he'd make getting the troops out of Iraq his top priority. One way to achieve it would be to put a squeeze on funding. And no more privatized armies allowed.

In a campaign release, Wiviott said, “Congress needs to ask Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus tough questions about the situation in Iraq and urge them to enact a major overhaul to our current open-ended strategy. Now it’s time to listen to the will of the American people and find a sensible end to the War that gets our troop’s out of harm’s way and allows the Iraqi people to reclaim their destiny.”

Don continued, “As I travel across Northern New Mexico, I continue to talk to citizens about their concerns and ask their input on how best to end the war. We need to heed the advice of the American people and make sure their voices are heard at the highest levels of government.”

Last week, Wiviott asked supporters to submit questions through his website that they would like to see Congress ask General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker. Below are five tough questions from Wiviott and concerned New Mexicans:

Has the War in Iraq actually made America safer?

What plans are in place to both get our troops out of Iraq and give the Iraqi army a chance to step up to the plate and protect their own country?

Since there is no military solution in Iraq, what steps are we taking to ensure Iraqi officials are working together and moving towards lasting political reconciliation?

The President and other top officials talk about winning the war. What criteria constitutes "winning" the war in Iraq? How will we know when we have "won"? 

How will you prepare to transition the US presence in Iraq to another administration?  Specifically, how will you prepare to pass the operation and embassy to an administration that plans to withdraw substantially from the current mission in Iraq?  How have you prepared the Iraqi government and people for this very real possibility?

The first three questions were submitted by Wiviott and the last two questions were submitted by supporters through his website.

In Congress, Wiviott has pledged to work with America’s military leaders and fight for legislation that keeps our troops safe and restores America’s strength on the international stage. Wiviott will work across the aisle to find a solution to our failed strategy in Iraq that is costing lives and untold billions.

National Attention
PS: Wiviott's ad and questions for General Petaeus and Ambassador Crocker are gaining some national attention. Matt Stoller over at Open Left says of Wiviott's Iraq ad, "This is a very smart way to use the national media environment to a candidate's advantage," and cites Wiviott's "using his platform as a candidate to put out an ad on Iraq in response to Petraeus's testimony."

To see our previous coverage of the 2008 Congressional race in NM-03, visit our archive.

April 7, 2008 at 02:54 PM in NM-03 Congressional Seat 2008 | Permalink

Comments

I'd like to ask Petraeus (and the media, I suppose) why there is such a big charade to create the illusion that he is a nonpartisan entity.  All of the nonpartisan military brass who chose to a go with their better instincts and oppose the invasion of Iraq are collecting their pensions.  Recently "retired" Admiral Fallon, who was convicted of speaking the truth and excommunicated called Petraeus an "ass kissing little chickenshit" .  I've no reason to suspect that any response given by Petraeus to any progressive question would envelop more than contempt.  Why bother asking him anything at all, he's an entirely partisan figure?

Posted by: | Apr 7, 2008 3:59:47 PM

Here we go: "Top general to urge patience"LOL...no, thanks.  Patience all used up.

Posted by: | Apr 8, 2008 6:26:45 AM

Is Wiviott a native New Mexican like Ben Ray Lujan? That is his achilles heel IMHO.

I am just saying shouldn't congressman have a vested interest in their own community?

I think most of us here are progressives and get annoyed when corporate greed tries to BUY an election. Wiviott is a well known green-developer.....not a suitable statesmen.

Posted by: Daniel | Apr 8, 2008 10:11:30 AM

I vote for candidates based on their abilities, positions and honesty. I think it's silly to vote for someone because they were born here rather than somewhere else. Wiviott has lived in NM a long time and been heavily involved in the community.

Wiviott has the strongest stand on getting out of Iraq and the environment and green energy and that's why I'll vote for him.

Lujan is a really nice guy but he barely has his college degree and has gotten where he is through the power of his father.

Posted by: Val | Apr 8, 2008 11:28:17 AM

"Frustrated senators see no Iraq exit signs: Petraeus, Crocker dance around questions of what constitutes success"

Bingo.

Posted by: | Apr 9, 2008 6:47:35 AM

I too believe it is foolish to support someone just because they are a native New Mexican. Lujan clearly has the best record, of all the candidates in the CD3 race. Wiviott isn't who he says he is... if he was such an environmentalist why did LCV endorse Lujan? Moreover, Max Coll's comments about Wivott are very concerning, he feels Wiviott has no regard for the Neighborhoods he develops in. Max Coll is one of the most respected progressive leaders in Santa Fe. If a neighborhood association and Max Coll opposes you in a Congressional race then you have issues.

Posted by: Change Agent | Apr 9, 2008 10:10:29 AM

The word is that Lujan is getting endorsements because groups are afraid of what his father will do to their bills in the NM House if they don't support his son.

The Max Coll thing is a silly local dispute with neighbors being against solar panels on roofs. Whoopie.

Many people are afraid to oppose Lujan or support Wiviott publicly because of Lujan's dad. Everybody knows that. Lujan means more of the same old politics everyone is tired of. We need a change.

Posted by: Norteno | Apr 9, 2008 12:17:05 PM

Max Coll didn't seem to think it was silly, nor did the neighborhood association who sued him to prevent the development. A developer who will do what he has to, to get what he wants is scary, and that's not the change I want. What is Lujan's dad going to do to Gene Karpinski and the LCV leadership in Washington, better yet what can he do? Nothing.

Shendo may be better a choice if that's your argument.

Posted by: For Change | Apr 9, 2008 4:22:02 PM

Everyone knows about neighbors complaining about developments in Santa Fe. It's almost impossible to get anything built, even a green development with artist space.

Of course Lujan senior has big clout in what kind of environmental and energy bills get through the legislature or haven't you noticed?

Wiviott is a strong, honest candidate with passionate views on the environment, energy, the war and the economy. I support him 100% and so does everyone else I know up north. Different from Lujan he's not taking money from uranium lobbyists and others with vested interests. That alone makes him a wonderful candidate in my book.

Shendo is a very cool guy but he doesn't have what it takes to win and neither would Lujan without his dad's help and donations from lobbyists.

Have you seen this?

https://nmfbihop.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=833

Posted by: Norteno | Apr 9, 2008 4:36:10 PM

Post a comment