The Fighting 29th

All about New York's 29th Congressional District

If you're not sick of reading about last week's protests and the "packing" comment, I have three observations to make. They're behind the jump to spare those who can't stand to hear another word.

1. Fights about dumb remarks occupy far too much bandwidth in today's political media.

   Randy Kuhl's "packing" remark barely rose to Michael Kinsley's definition of a gaffe: "when a politician tells the truth -- or, more precisely, when he or she accidentally reveals something truthful about what is going on in his or her head." Kuhl's remark was more of a dumb, offhand comment, one which might have gone unnoticed in a friendly gathering, but not when he was on the record.

   The ensuing controversy was essentially political theater, which is often a contest over who's more offended. Kuhl was offended that the D&C would print his comment "out of context". His opponent was offended by the "gansta rap" term.

   The real reason that so much time is spent on dumb comments like these isn't hurt feelings. Reporters and partisans have decided that a few dumb comments, or perhaps a dumb stunt, is enough to end the career of a politician. Recent examples include Howard Dean, and perhaps, Mitt Romney. But that's a presidential race, not a race for Congress where most of Kuhl's constituents have known him for 20 years. Residents of the 29th have already formed a more durable impression of Kuhl, one that can probably withstand a few dumb remarks.

   So follows my second observation:

2. Portraying Randy Kuhl as a bad, bad man won't lead to his defeat.

   Every time Kuhl says something dumb, which isn't that often, a legion of partisans resurrect every bad fact we know about Kuhl, and draw outrageous conclusions about him as a person. These conclusions fly in the face of the facts: Kuhl may be a flawed person (as are we all), but he's not crazy, and he's a hard worker.

   Kuhl is active in his district, has an almost-perfect attendance record, and has a long history in the Southern Tier. If he's going to be beaten, it won't be because of his personal history, which everyone has processed, nor will it be from a couple of dumb comments. Kuhl's going to have to be beaten on lack of responsiveness on substantial issues.

   If you want to see what a lazy, crazy Member of Congress looks like, take a look at Barbara Cubin. Babs likes to make racist remarks, threatened to slap her wheelchair-bound opponent after a debate, and missed more votes this session than a Congresswoman who died in April. Cubin is the kind of disaster that Democrats wish for. Kuhl isn't, and viewing him as such is a dangerous miscalculation.

   Since Kuhl will be beat on issues and responsiveness, let's move on to the most important point:

3. The whole "security" controversy is the transparent attempt to change the subject from our security to Kuhl's.

   Kuhl's "packing" comment garnered all the attention, but even if he hadn't said it, he still would be guilty of dragging a security red herring into the discussion about opposition to the war.

   Kuhl portrayed the protesters as outsiders with "rap sheets". I've been in contact with one of the protesters. Here's his "rap sheet":

   1) violation trespassing - for locking myself in my church's bell tower with another guy and ringing the bell in mourning for the dead, when the war first began.
   
   2) Rounded up by the capital police in DC last September, along with various priests, pastors, nuns, monks, and people of faith, as we made our way to the Senate office building. I paid fifty bucks and was released without being charged with a crime.
   
   3) This latest one is being called criminal trespassing.

   These are not life-endangering offenses. There may be some threat to Kuhl's office, but it doesn't come from a bunch of pacifists who live in the district or around nearby Cayuga Lake.

   The reason Kuhl tried to change the subject to his security is because he's arguably made the rest of us less secure. Right before coming home last week, Kuhl was on the wrong side of another symbolic though damaging vote on HR 3159. That bill mandates reasonable deployment periods for soldiers and reservists. Kuhl's colleague Jim Walsh (NY-25), who's also facing a tough election, voted for the bill, because he knows political dynamite when he sees it.

   This bill is about the true security issue facing our country. The Iraq war is wearing out our ground forces, and inflicting long-term damage on our military. Recruiting is way down, even after standards have been lowered. If we are really facing a "long war", we might well lack the military capacity to fight it.

   The protest arrests gave Kuhl a convenient excuse to change the subject, but at some point he'll have to address the damage done by the war, and that's a daunting issue for a man whose party is supposed to be best at keeping us safe.