- The Washington Times - Monday, September 16, 2002

Where are they now?
Rep. Mark Foley, Florida Republican, wonders why Democrats who in 2000 demanded endless recounts of Bush versus Gore are now silent about the disputed Democratic gubernatorial primary in Florida.
Mr. Foley, in a prepared statement Friday, urged reporters to call the same South Florida members of Congress who were constantly on television and at protests in 2000, as well as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and ask them why they are not speaking out on behalf of former Attorney General Janet Reno, who trails Tampa lawyer Bill McBride in the wake of Tuesday's primary vote. Miss Reno is unhappy because of problems at polling places in South Florida, which was considered a Reno stronghold.
"Every day I watched Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson play the race card with phony claims of discrimination at the ballot boxes. I watched the Democrats scream that 'every vote counts.' Now, where's the outrage? Doesn't every vote count now? Or is voter suppression acceptable only when it helps a favored Democrat?"
Mr. Foley added that the "question of the fall" might become whether or not Tampa lawyer Bill McBride is a legitimate candidate come Nov. 5. "His legitimacy is definitely in question," Mr. Foley said.

A party of bystanders
"It has been a long time since this journal felt so despondent about the Democratic Party," the editors of the New Republic say in this week's issue.
"The United States is today engaged in perhaps the most important foreign policy debate in a generation. In response to a reverberating catastrophe and a terrifying threat, the administration of George W. Bush has proposed a radical new doctrine to govern America's role in the world, one that commits the United States to war in Iraq and perhaps beyond. Foreign leaders warn that by assuming the right to attack sovereign states on the basis of a potential threat, the Bush administration is rewriting the rules of the international system and lifting a taboo that has kept large chunks of the globe at peace. Retired American diplomats and generals worry that war with Iraq could radicalize much of the Muslim world. The highbrow press increasingly writes and talks of little else. And yet with the possible exception of Joe Lieberman, the leaders of the Democratic Party have nothing serious to say," the magazine asserted.
"Oh, the party's leaders speak: They appear on talk shows; they write op-eds; they convene congressional hearings. But most of what they say is best understood as highly articulate evasiveness. They have devised a series of formulations designed to make the party appear to be offering a clear response to the president's proposed war, when it is actually doing the opposite. In fact, Washington's leading Democrats have neither taken a forthright position on an invasion of Iraq nor seriously answered the Bush administration theory of preemption that justifies it. No one today can honestly say he or she is a Democrat because of what the party believes about the greatest threat facing the United States. The Democrats are a party of bystanders, a party without a position on the issue that matters most."

Keeper of the flame
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat, went on television yesterday and again argued for repealing or postponing the Bush tax cuts.
"I don't see any alternative," Mrs. Clinton said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
"And what bothers me is that the administration and their allies in Congress have not been willing to admit that their economic policies have failed. Long-term unemployment is up. Health care costs are up. People are worried about their pension and retirement security. And on top of that, we are having to do more in homeland security to make sure we've got the resources to protect ourselves."
Meanwhile, Paul Bedard reports in the Washington Whispers column of U.S. News & World Report that Mrs. Clinton "is fast becoming known in the Senate Democratic caucus as the keeper of the liberal flame. Insiders say she often forcefully defends left-leaning positions when others talk of compromise."

Price to pay
"While New Hampshire conservatives were fighting over the merits of Sen. Bob Smith and Rep. John Sununu in a high-profile Senate primary, the race to replace to succeed Sununu in the 1st congressional district slipped off the radar screen and there may now be a price to pay," John J. Miller writes at National Review Online (www.nationalreview.com).
"Eight Republicans ran for the nomination, most of them conservative. They managed to split the vote so many different ways that state representative Jeb Bradley grabbed the nomination. The Manchester Union Leader has dubbed him 'a liberal, pro-choice Republican who may not energize conservatives.' If there were a runoff, he would almost certainly lose. In Bradley's favor, however, is the fact that he was probably the most polished candidate in the GOP field. The district leans Republican, but it's no gimme. Ultraliberal Democrat Martha Fuller Clark gave Sununu a slight scare two years ago; this year she has lots of money, and Democrats are determined to provide her with all the help she needs to capture this open seat."

Sudden stalemate
"Florida's latest election fiasco this [past] week has everyone shouting once more for reform, but keep your eye on the bouncing political motive. Democratic Party Chief Terry McAuliffe has decided he needs the issue, not actual reform, to gin up his base to vote this November," the Wall Street Journal says.
"This explains the sudden partisan stalemate over an election reform bill that passed both the House and Senate, the latter last April by 99-1. Out of the blue, or rather out of the brain of Mr. McAuliffe and friends, Senate Democrats are now having second thoughts about anti-fraud provisions that they all voted for. They're making new demands that renege on earlier deals, all in order to revive this fall the cry of black-voter 'disenfranchisement' from 2000," the newspaper said in an editorial.
"The shame is that this is scuttling two years of bipartisan work. Republicans put aside their normal objections to new federal programs, agreeing to spend money so local election boards can upgrade voting systems and voter lists; voters left off a list would still be allowed to cast a provisional ballot that can be verified later."

Trumpeting a win
"The Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, a political action committee supporting the campaign efforts of openly homosexual candidates, is trumpeting the victory of state Rep. David Cicilline in the race for the Democrat nomination to be mayor of Providence, R.I.," United Press International reports in its Capital Comment column.
"According to the fund, 'In [this] overwhelmingly Democratic city, that amounts to a win in the general election. It also means that Providence will replace Tempe, Ariz., as the largest American city with an openly gay mayor.'
"'What's really exciting about Cicilline's victory is the high profile of the mayor's office,' Bob Kearney, political director of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund said. 'He'll represent one out of every seven Rhode Islanders, and if he does a good job, he'll be rewarded with a bright political future perhaps making it to the governor's office or to the U.S. Senate.'"

Simple subject
Radical-turned-conservative David Horowitz sparked protests last year when he toured college campuses explaining his opposition to reparations for slavery.
Tonight at 7, Mr. Horowitz will appear at Catholic University's Gowan Hall to speak to campus Republicans on a subject that is also the title of his latest book: "How to Beat the Democrats."

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide