Rep. Brad Miller

Matthew Murray writes about one of my favorite topics in this morning's edition of Roll Call; unseating Elizabeth Dole. Unfortunately, some of what the article reports is not news we'd like to hear.

Murray writes that:

Cross posted from The Progressive Pulse
Put it on a bumper sticker. For Brad Miller, or any other Democrat who is considering a run against Elizabeth Dole, your campaign does not need to be any more complicated than that.

Voters need to be relentlessly reminded that Elizabeth Dole has been nothing more than a loyal lap-dog for George Bush. His administration, and Dole’s judgment, have been disastrous both for our country and for North Carolina.

Rep. Brad Miller was just on Headline Saturday, follow this link to watch.

Today I recieved an email from Representative Brad Miller, our Favorite Congressman. Many have been watching the debate on CNN, but if you, like me, were unable to hear Brad speak, here is a copy of his speach....

Mr. Miller: I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks.

Mr. Speaker, like most members of Congress, I have visited our men and women in uniform in Iraq. I have visited our wounded at the hospital at Ramstein Air Force Base in Germany, and at the hospital in Balad Air Base in Iraq. I have offered my condolences to grieving families who have lost loved ones in Iraq.

I respect and appreciate our men and women in uniform in Iraq. They have served nobly, and they deserve our praise.

Mr. Speaker, they have done their duty.

And now we must do our duty.

Our duty to the Constitution, our duty to our country, our duty to our men and women in uniform, is to look with clear eyes at the facts, and to exercise independent judgment.

For four years this Congress has failed in that duty.

For four years this Congress has passed one resolution after another offering uncritical support for the President's policies in Iraq. In June Congress passed a resolution finding that we were along the path to "a sovereign, free, secure and united Iraq" and that Iraqi security forces were "operating independently" of our forces and were increasingly leading the fight to secure Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, that's what Republicans did about Iraq when they were in the majority, they played make believe.

Americans knew better then, and we certainly know better now.

The Iraq Study Group report just a couple of months ago described the situation in Iraq as "grave and deteriorating." The most recent National Intelligence Estimate, just a week ago, described the situation in even starker terms. The violence is now feeding on itself, and is too complex to be called simply a "civil war." The estimate concluded that all of the likely outcomes are grim.

For four years, patriotic Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike, have anguished over events in Iraq, and given deep and prayerful thought to alternatives. But the Bush Administration dismissed and insulted dissenters, and often made fierce attempts to discredit them. Not even General Eric Shinseki, the Chief of Staff of the Army, or James Baker, Secretary of State for the first President Bush, were spared.

And the Bush Administration has treated criticisms of Members of Congress as meddling, as sticking our nose in their war.

House Democrats have offered plan after plan to alter our course in Iraq, and House Republicans greeted every plan with strident attacks.

Let's consider the new plan that President Bush has proposed.

The force initially committed fell far short of what General Shinseki said would be required to secure Iraq. When I visited Iraq three years ago, the presence of our forces in Baghdad may not have been enough to secure order, but it was more than enough to remind every Iraqi every day that there was a foreign army on their soil.

When I visited Iraq a year and a half ago, our military forces in Baghdad were less noticeable. Our briefing officer explained that we had deliberately "reduced our footprint" to lessen the resentment of Iraqis, so that Iraqis would come into daily contact with Iraqi security forces, not our men and women. But the violence only increased.

We tried twice last year to reduce the violence by increasing Iraqi and American forces in Baghdad. The Iraqi forces didn't show, and violence has continued to increase.

Now we're trying it again, and calling it a new plan. Less troops, more troops, less troops, more troops. House Republicans are playing make believe again in calling that a new plan.

The apocalyptic violence in Iraq will not be solved militarily. Congressman David Price and I introduced a resolution setting forth a comprehensive plan, which Mr. Price described here the other day. We need to engage Iraq's neighbors through regional diplomacy, to provide economic assistance conditioned on a genuine attempt at national reconciliation, and to begin a phased withdrawal of our troops. Our plan includes many of the suggestions of the Iraq Study Group report.

The Iraq Study Group report was right, no path is certain of success, and after four years of a failed policy, all of our options are grim.

But the resolution we will vote on shortly is a first step toward doing our duty by looking realistically at events in Iraq, and by forcing us to consider what our options really are.

As always, thank you for your continued support.

Sincerely,

Brad