Just between you and me, Correa called

I got a telephone call from State Senator Lou Correa today.  He asked me to keep the conversation between the two of us and to not post it on TheLiberalOC.com, but he agreed that I had every right to share his reasoning if I chose to do so.

The back-story: State Senator Lou Correa voted against SJR1, which was a resolution opposing the escalation of a troop surge in Iraq.  The vote was 9 days ago, and I’ve been calling daily since then trying to get an explanation of the vote.

Correa said that his “no” vote was a straight-forward thing.  “This resolution missed the mark,” he said.  “We can’t send the wrong message to our soldiers over there.”

Until Congress makes the decision to bring home our troops, Correa thinks that we should do all that we can to support them—and opposing Bush’s troop surge, in Correa’s eyes, is not supportive.

“Are you going to be calling 250,000 people to tell them what made you vote ‘no’ on SJR1?” I asked, referring to the number of voters that are registered in the 34th State Senate District.

“I actually represent more that 850,000 people, Mr. Lawson.  Thanks for the call,” he said before hanging up.

Correa said that he has no intention of releasing a press statement; he will just be calling back the individuals that have called him.  I think that it sounds like a waste of the Senator’s time…but if you would like to have more information about why Correa voted “no” on SJR1, give him a ring at (916)651-4034.

  7 comments for “Just between you and me, Correa called

  1. Voix Velour
    February 21, 2007 at 10:05 am

    Sen Correa should be applauded for a vote he cast upon intelligent reflection. There has been a change in direction of military strategies in Iraq and reliance on The Joint Chiefs of Staff may very possibly be a decision that was forced upon Bushliters by public angst and frustration.

    It is not as if there is a “Little Yellow Bus” system to “withdraw troops.” It is Very Dicey. Very Human Lives of our Armed Forces might well be at risk Outcomes might be catastrophic to an extent of Many More Lives of The Armed Forces required to attempt to reverse that scenario. And the “armchair generals” casually devising strategic and tactical planning are not those to be part of the solution.

  2. February 21, 2007 at 10:46 am

    I’m glad that Lou returned your call. And yes, I’m glad that he did take the time to explain his vote to you and to me. But still, I’d think that it would be easier for him to just release a public statement for everyone to see. But whatever, at least he is talking to us about it. While I still disagree with his vote, I appreciate our Senator’s willingness to discuss this with us.
    : )

  3. demmother
    February 21, 2007 at 11:28 am

    This has always been the rub.

    I do not know anyone who supports the occupation of Iraq or for escalating this ‘war’ supposedly on terrorism. I think we still need to assist our NATO Allies in Afghanistan – to me, that is where the bad guys are.

    I believe supporting our troops would be bringing them home from Iraq, making sure they get all of the medical treatment they need, and making sure that they recieve a discharge package comparable to what we gave out WW II vets.

    I agree with our Senator, until we have an exit strategy that makes sense, we don’t want to give the Reeps anadditional fodder for saying the Dems are against our troops.

  4. dem anon
    February 21, 2007 at 11:51 am

    This is a load of garbage. Our troops are no safer there with a troop surge, nor in greater danger in the process of leaving. In fact, the actions indicating that our troops were leaving would make them safer, as most of the people shooting at them and blowing them up are doing so because they want us out. They’re not going to make it hard or dangerous for the troops to leave when that’s what they want.

    As for not doing anything to look bad in the Reeps’ eyes, that’s why we’re in this war – because the democrats have lost the war of intimidation. SOMEONE needs to stand up and tell the Reeps we don’t care what they say, we’re going to do the right thing no matter what it looks like. I guess Lou just isn’t that someone. (Dennis Kucinich is, but he’s in Congress, not the CA leg.)

  5. ThomasGordon
    February 21, 2007 at 9:11 pm

    “the longer we stay the more insurgents are recruited”

    Oh sure.

    Once we leave all the Islamic wackjobs will get in their RV’s, go home and get back to all that peaceful stuff that they have been up to for the last several thousand years. Like killing Jews and women and Christians and children and…………

  6. Lee Lemke
    February 21, 2007 at 11:54 pm

    Because of this my opinion of Correa has gone up. Maybe we can add him to the list with Liberman of Dems who put their country ahead of partisan political advantage. That would make 2 on the list. It is too bad that Dems are trying so hard to undermine our winning the Iraq War just because they think it will give them something they can blame Rep for in 2008. Murtha’s ideas that if we leave Al Queda will disappear and there won’t be chaos in Iraq is ridiculous.

  7. Dan Chmielewski
    February 22, 2007 at 7:16 am

    So, do the Brits now qualify as traitors since they have announced plans to withdraw? Poland is down to a handful of troops.

    You bring up an interesting point Lee. Are their any Republicans out there who put their country ahead of their party?

Comments are closed.