Senator Webb

Webb, an early opponent of the war in Iraq, might make his mark in the Senate in foreign and military affairs," says a Washington Post Metro reporter with an interest in this turning out to be true. "Current and former politicians said they expect him to become the face of the Democratic Party's antiwar movement."

Some skepticism about the accuracy of that speculation aside, I'd like to see it become true; Webb has the right cultural and personal characteristics to sell an anti-war message. Post-9/11, I think an awful lot of Democrats have tried to compensate for having bad personal/characterological attributes for the politics of national security by adopting substantively bad policy positions -- John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden come to mind -- and this doesn't work very well. Webb's roughly the reverse, and feels no need to act defensive about being a patriot and supporting the troops and it worked well for him in the campaign despite the fact that he's not a very natural campaigner.

Comments

Closely related is the point that a lot of Democrats who made the wrong call on the Gulf War felt an overwhelming compulsion to not get fooled again. What if it really turns out to be a cakewalk, they must have thought to themselves, and here I am looking like a stupid hippie again? So they took a guess that it would turn out fine and they guessed poorly.

Folks like Al Gore who were right on the Gulf War felt no such compulsion and were able to objectively assess Iraq as a bad idea. The moral is that getting the big issues right pays many sorts of dividends.

Posted by Steve | December 5, 2006 10:28 AM

Webb's smart and apparently thinks for himself, and by definition threatens the Right Wing. They don't know, yet, if he's as un-ambitious as Moynihan was. Until then, right or wrong, he'll always draw the fire of toadies like George Will.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | December 5, 2006 10:41 AM

I don't know if the first Gulf War was that big a deal in this context. What about Joementum?

Posted by Haggai | December 5, 2006 10:41 AM

Matthew Y:

You're dismissing Biden's, Kerry's and Clinton's votes for the war with the familiar unverifiable assertion that they "wanted to look tough on national security" or the corollary "they were scared of being painted as weak.

They may have wanted the war out of conviction. We'll never know their shrivelled little hearts or minds, but everything they did through the 2004 election indicated Steadfast and Staunch support for the whole murderous adventure. What we do know for sure is that certain favored constituents, i.e. donors, wanted the war. Of the three, only Kerry, even at this late hour, even in the face of national revulsion, favors a withdrawal. And he's just saying that.

These people are no less committed to the war than the editors of the Washington Post. Why?

Posted by brendan | December 5, 2006 10:43 AM

I think an awful lot of Democrats have tried to compensate for having bad personal/characterological attributes for the politics of national security by adopting substantively bad policy positions -- John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden come to mind -- and this doesn't work very well.

And this is Reason #1 not to support Ms. Clinton for Prez. She'd be under more pressure than any to prove that she has the balls/ovaries to be Strong on National Defense. And I seriously doubt that Gulf of Tonkin 2 would be Electric Boogaloo.

Gore/Clark '08.

Posted by Ed | December 5, 2006 11:15 AM

Prime Minister Olmert also offers a good case study in what happens when you try to compensate through excessive hawkishness.

Posted by Steve | December 5, 2006 11:33 AM

" Webb has the right cultural and personal characteristics to sell an anti-war message."

Let us not forget that Webb did not win that senate race by winning evangelicals in southside, the west, or southwest, but because yuppies in Fairfax were pissed enough to vote in an off year election, and give him one of the most narrow margins of victory of any senate race in recent times.

Posted by Linus | December 5, 2006 11:45 AM

"characterological attributes?" huh?

I think America needed one more hit of carnage before we could put the military away for another 20-30 years.

I don't think Webb could have stopped the Iraq War even if he was in office back in 2002/3.

Does anyone believe that he could have?

Now that he is in office, big deal.

Hell, 70% of Americans think it was a huge mistake.

Rosalynn Carter could be the anti-war face of the Democratic party these days and be as effective as Webb.

Posted by alphie | December 5, 2006 11:56 AM

Linus:

How can a Fairfax county resident be a "yuppie"?

Your little categorizations aren't just reductive and insulting, they're inept.

Posted by brendan | December 5, 2006 3:47 PM

In any case, the first time I hear the phrase "600-ship navy" from Webb I'm heading right for the liquor cabinet.

Posted by WatchfulBabbler | December 5, 2006 5:53 PM

How can a Fairfax county resident be a "yuppie"?

? There's almost nothing but yuppies in Fairfax County.

Posted by Duvall | December 5, 2006 6:26 PM

Um, let's not get carried away here. Webb's about as likely to head up the anti-war wing of the Democratic Party as Murtha is.

There's anti-war, and then there's anti-war. Webb and Murtha are the former, and my hunch is that the majority of the anti-war Dems are the latter.

I'd be really interested to see how people in the anti-war Dem wing react when faced with a Sen. Webb or Rep. Murtha who reverts to their old hawkish ways. My guess is that they'd come in for a fair bit of opprobrium.

Posted by Raf Noboa | December 5, 2006 10:33 PM

Re: There's anti-war, and then there's anti-war.

Are you trying to say that there are people who are just anti-Iraq war as opposed to people who are against all wars? If so, I rather doubt most Democrats (and certanly not most Americans) fall into the latter category of being total pacifists

Posted by JonF | December 6, 2006 6:03 AM

Webb's an ex-Marine, decorated for battlefield conduct & was Reagan's Sec of the Navy. He's a Scoop Jackson Democrat. IOW: no way in hell is he anti-war. He's anti this war.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | December 6, 2006 9:04 AM