The two most talked-about candidates in their respective parties in my home district are Michelle Lujan-Grisham and Darren White. At first glance, I am having a hard time finding a reason to support White. He is, he says, “an optimistic person.” That’s no good at all. Meanwhile, Ms. Lujan-Grisham says that the “war in Iraq must end.” That’s what we want to hear. The choice seems clear: optimism cannot be tolerated.
White is actually our Sheriff, and he has a record for competence. He stands a reasonably good chance of getting elected, but as of right now I have no clear idea of what his policy views are. Also, Ms. Lujan-Grisham is a native New Mexican, while White is another transplant, just like Wilson. I may have been born in Colorado, but even I have lived in New Mexico before White did. He’s going to have to make a pretty strong pitch to win back voters, including me, whom Wilson alienated.
That’s no good at all. Meanwhile, Ms. Lujan-Grisham says that the “war in Iraq must end.†That’s what we want to hear. The choice seems clear: optimism cannot be tolerated.
Might I suggest that you are confusing optimism with hubris?
The War Party is the true “pessimist” party– the party that tells us “if we leave Iraq, it will become an al Qaeda sanctuary” and “if we leave Iraq, it will lead to the creation of a Shiite superstate that will become the Islamic version of Nazi Germany.” What could possibly be more pessimistic than to assert that the only way for the US to be secure is to invade and occupy underdeveloped nations on the other side of the world — and what could be more hubristic than to believe that this strategy can be accomplished with ease, and with little loss of American lives or treasure?
It is those who oppose the occupation that are the true optimists — we don’t see the US departure from Iraq as an awaiting disaster, but as an opportunity for the US to begin to regain its stature in the international community…