According to Eric Black over at Minnesota Monitor, "Ciresi campaign confirmed as much to me this week -- that Ciresi did nothing to publicly express this opposition until he became a Senate candidate this year."
But apparently after much back and forth, Ciresi finally remembered and provided the names of a couple of close friends that he had private conversations with regarding his opposition to the war prior to being a candidate this year.....Hmm...well I say...if he can just find the protests he attended, petitions he signed, letters he wrote, and anti-war organizations he funded, then his private stance will become much more meaningful (and believeable!).
I was one of those that received a call from a calling house in New Jersey last week asking who I supported for U.S. Senate, after saying Franken, I was then push polled by the caller saying 'Would you still support Al Franken if you knew he supported the war in Iraq unlike Senate candidate Mike Ciresi who was against the Iraq war since the beginning?"
My answer was over 80% of the American people supported the war in Iraq based on what their President and his advisers mislead them to believe. Now only 27% support war in Iraq. Most of those were victims of a belief that the American President wouldn't lie to them, or use incorrect data to lead them into a war.
Saying Mike Ciresi was among the minority that didn't support the war from the beginning doesn't change anything. Ciresi did nothing to make it different...he neither wrote, or petitioned, or posted, or countered the war other than to have private conversations over wine with a select group of close friends...hmmm...not much to brag about there..
And another thing...who paid for the above mentioned polling? When I asked the pollster he first mentioned the DFL, when I questioned that he changed and said it was a private party calling DFLers and couldn't give me the information. Personally, I don't mind being asked who I support and why...but why the follow up question? Is that really an ethical way to campaign (again don't know who paid for the poll, could be a third party.) Since receiving the call I know of two other State Central members who have received calls from the same calling house.
But private stance and push polling aside...who jumped on the band wagon first shouldn't be the qualifier for supporting a candidate...things like character, ethics, personal integrity, public work and community service should all come into play as well as their stances on issues. At the end of it all, I feel it's important to vote for someone that overall will reflect your values and work toward them.