Since we’re rarely recognized by the big box national blogs, I thought you all should know:
Markos Moulitsas, owner and creator of the famous liberal blog, Daily Kos, believes LA-06 is up for grabs. And so do the people at the Cook Report (password required), who recently changed their assessment from Leans Republican to “Toss Up.”
Typically, however, Markos can’t resist hitting Cazayoux on his stances on abortion and immigration. He writes:
To be sure, the Democrat in the race, Don Cazayoux, is rabidly anti-immigrant and anti-choice. He brags about joining the Blue Dogs. He would be a terrible person on social issues, which is enough to ensure I won’t lift a finger to help get him elected. But he would be a good vote on the occasional issue like SCHIP and has called for a withdrawal from Iraq. So instead of getting 0 percent progressivism from a wingnut Republican, 30-50 percent would be an improvement. That can matter quite a bit, especially for our troops in Iraq.
It’s totally disingenuous to suggest that Cazayoux’s stances on immigration and abortion are “rabid” or that he would be “terrible” on social issues (I suppose this bold assumption was based entirely on two or three sentences Markos read on Cazayoux’s website), and I honestly don’t understand Markos’s uneven “support.”
First, as someone noted in the comment thread, Cazayoux is not anti-immigration; he’s against amnesty for illegal immigrants. Markos’s conflation of the issue of amnesty for illegals with the broader issue of immigration is intellectually dishonest.
And regarding abortion, Cazayoux is pro-life, but I haven’t seen or read any evidence to suggest that his opinion on abortion is somehow rabid. On his website, Cazayoux writes, “I am pro-life. This is a position that my wife and I share and its rooted in my faith. In the legislature, I supported one of the strongest pro-life laws in the country and in Congress, I will continue my work to protect the unborn.” He’s talking about a bill passed under Governor Blanco, another Democrat. Again, how is this rabid?
More importantly, why even focus on these issues?
Don Cazayoux is against the War in Iraq.
I believe we need to change directions in Iraq and bring our troops home responsibly and with honor while continuing to focus on national security and winning the war on terror.
I also believe we must take care of our brave men and women when they come home from war. I was appalled when we learned about the conditions at Walter Reed Hospital and concerned about reports that our soldiers have difficulties returning to civilian life. In Congress, I will work to ensure we treat our brave sons and daughters with the respect they deserve and give them the tools they need as they transition back to civilian life.
He has progressive views on health care, education, and the economy.
Can we have disagreements without hyperbolizing?
I don’t necessarily agree with Cazayoux on abortion or amnesty, but I’d never accuse him of being rabid. It’s just not productive, particularly for someone who wishes to defeat the NRCC. Markos writes:
Perhaps more importantly, how much money will the NRCC blow from its meager coffers to try and hold yet another supposedly safe Republican seat? How much of a blow to the NRCC’s confidence and fundraising ability will another unlikely special election loss deliver? Gaining another Blue Dog would be a small price to pay for having a decimated NRCC lead to dozens of progressive victories around the country. Many of which will be elected thanks to our enthusiastic support.
Race tracker wiki: LA-06.
CenLamar 