2002 Elections
Political Hack Karl "Bush's Brain" Rove publicly instructed Republicans to cast Democrats as unpatriotic. In lock-step, all across the country, GOPocrites keep attacking Democrats' courage and commitment to national security. Even Republican chicken hawks like Georgia Rep. Saxby Chambliss keep attacking war heroes like Georgia Senator Max Cleland as cowardly Saddam Hussein supporters.
The DNC emailed a "rapid response" to this bizarre Republican smear: "In an attack ad running on television stations across Georgia, the Saxby Chambliss campaign questions the patriotism of Senator Max Cleland, an American hero who has proven his commitment to American security again and again. With footage of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, this disgusting attack actually compares Senator Cleland to America's enemies."
This quick, accurate Democratic counter to the Republicans' dirty trick ad continues: "Let's look at the facts: Senator Max Cleland Volunteered for service in Vietnam in 1967. Was awarded the Bronze Star and the Silver Star for meritorious service. Senator Cleland is a warrior and a true American hero who made enormous sacrifices for his country. Saxby Chambliss received at least four student deferments to stay out of Vietnam."
Max Cleland fought in Vietnam, and lost three limbs on the field of battle. Chambliss stayed state-side, safe and sound. Aside from the shocking GOPocrisy this shows, Rove's repulsive script signals how dishonest, dirty and desperate Republicans are. For the record, Rove never served his nation either.
This triumph of proud Democratic facts over craven Republican lies demonstrates the ethical differences between the parties, as well as their worthiness to lead. Critically important, this lightning strike response also shows the Democrats are not letting the Republicans bully them.
Still, Republicans keep trying to paint Democrats as peaceniks we can't trust to keep us safe. This is not working, largely because of these absurd overstatements. Also because the Democratic leadership refused to fall for the Republicans' clever trap.
Repudiating the smears, Democrats endorsed defending America from the real but grossly exaggerated threat posed by Saddam Hussein. They did not give in without a fight, however. They forced Bush to abandon his "go it alone" posture which shunned Congressional input, our allies, and UN Security Council authorization.
After much haggling, many Democrats supported a resolution granting Bush authority to defend America from Iraq contingent on UN support and only after exhausting all diplomatic avenues. This is the position Al Gore articulated, and the one most Americans support.
Rove lost round one. However, he deviously sought to drive a wedge between "peace" activists and the Democrats who voted to support the Republican resolution on Iraq. To some degree, this is working as people like Michael Moore hope to make Iraq a litmus test. I've seen many good Democrats swept up by this issue, almost to the point of turning against even the most strongly anti-war Democrats.
Rove hopes we will attack only Democrats who supported the resolution while giving Republicans a free pass. So far, people like Michael Moore are playing into Bush's hands -- as many did in 2000 -- by branding all Democrats as no different from Republicans, refusing to credit the dozens of brave Democrats who voted against the revised resolution.
Will these Senators and Representatives lose support as people like Moore attack their fellow Democrats? If so, what message would that send to other Democrats who want to oppose Bush's agenda? I don't think they should and I doubt they will.
Unfortunately for Republican candidates, most will not benefit from blatant attempts to exploit national security issues and efforts to distract voters from exploding unemployment, the collapsing stock market, and rampant corporate crime.
Democrats in states and districts with a lot of peace activists voted against the resolution. Those in less placid areas wear Moore's scorn as a badge of honor. Either way, a strong Democrat will pose a real challenge to the Republican candidate -- and there are many strong Democrats running.
I've watched several debates on CSPAN and saw several capable Democratic candidates articulating a profoundly positive message. They admitted neither party had all the answers, and voiced disagreements with other Democrats and even their campaign contributors. Most Republicans refused to do this.
Even "liberal" Republican Connie Morella in the 8th District of Maryland would not break with her leaders like Tom DeLay. Asked point blank what she would do if her vote for the House leadership would split a tie, Morella refused to pledge her support for the Democrats over the right wing Republicans.
Morella's challenger, State Senator Chris Van Hollen explained how DeLay's agenda is hostile to her voters. He eagerly announced his support for the Democratic House leadership. Rather than confront her party's extremists, Morella is embracing them -- and their big financial backing.
After a remarkable string of successful campaigns stressing her independence and moderation, Morella is also embracing Republican scorched earth politics. Once a stolidly positive campaigner, Morella has gone desperately negative.
While Democrats articulate a reasonable, pro-American, nonpartisan theme, all the Republicans I watched expressed unabashedly blind support of Bush. This is a liability, as voters understand that Bush indulges the extreme right wing of his party over the public interest.
Over and over, in debate after debate, the Democrats explained how their opponent placed party over country. If the voters are paying attention, at least some of them will punish the Republicans who sold out their state or district for the sake of partisan politics. All indications show the voters are paying attention.
Here's one glaring example: Top law-enforcement officials use "ballistic fingerprints" to trace guns used in violent crimes like the current DC area murder spree. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) recommended using this technology to help trace guns used by violent criminals.
Democrats want to protect the public and empower police by compiling a ballistic database ahead of time, rather than waiting until a gun is used for crimes. This would let police match evidence to the perpetrator and make it easier to catch criminals like the Suburban Sniper.
This issue is a no-brainer for almost all Americans. Nothing in such a program would infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms. However, when asked about this, Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer didn't bother to check before answering. He knows the Bush administration's line on guns, because it's the same as the National Rifle Association (NRA) position -- against all gun safety.
Since this remark provoked a political backlash which might cost Republicans votes, the Bush Occupation has tried to back pedal. Fleischer's knee-jerk rejection of this common sense concept reveals the ugly truth: the Republican Party is so in debt to the NRA, the White House disdains all gun safety measures.
Bush's top cop, Attorney General John Ashcroft seeks to eliminate all gun control through a radical reinterpretation of the Constitution. Ashcroft therefore opposes new gun safety laws and refuses to enforce the laws on the books. Ashcroft disrespects all non-citizen residents' civil rights except one. He will not let the FBI use their gun ownership records to help identify suspected terrorists!
All across America, Republican desperation translates into dirty politics. The media is doing all they can to help. Morella's bizarre embrace of politics hostile to her voters is hardly the only example. Republican Ohio Governor Taft attacks his opponent dishonestly, ticking off the problems facing the state and speaking as if his challenger were the incumbent.
Career bureaucrat Lizzy Dole blasted her foe, Democrat Erskine Bowles, with gross misrepresentations and lies about their positions on Social Security and other issues. Dole should have won her race for North Carolina Senator in a cake walk, but she isn't. Her desperation showed in an unexpectedly close race to hold the Jesse Helms seat for the GOP.
Dole has been a household name at least since her husband began running for president. She briefly ran for president herself in 2000. Well over 100,000 people in the state watched the debate on PBS, a number rivaling the top-rated prime time shows. Clearly many voters were watching to find out more about her rival before making their choice. They had to find Bowles impressive. Dole is likely to lose.
In the Massachusetts Governor's Race, Democrat Shannon O'Brien favors full, equal rights for all Americans -- including gays and lesbians. As the Boston Herald reported, O'Brien said, "I am committed to making sure that we have equal rights for gay and lesbian couples and I will work to make those equal rights a reality."
Still, the Boston Herald concocted contradictions in O'Brien's statements to help her GOP opponent "Mitt" Romney deflect the fall-out from his quotes bashing gays as "perverse and reprehensible." See: O'Brien Flip-Flops in Favor of Gay Marriage Legislation, Elisabeth J. Beardsley and Karen E. Crummy, Boston Herald, October 16, 2002:
http://www2.bostonherald.com/news/local_regional/gov10162002.htm.
Somehow, the Pro-Republican Boston Herald spun O'Brien's courageous stand as a "flip-flop" while covering for the admittedly "'hostile' to homosexuals" [sic] Republican candidate "Mitt" Romney. As Rep. Barney Frank questioned Romney's remarks such which reveal bigotry, the Romney camp desperately tried to change the subject, and viciously attacked their opponent with cheap shots and distortions. This episode shows Massachusetts voters have a clear choice on November 5: Hate and bigotry with Romney, or inclusion and equality with O'Brien.
Democrats are making that case in the face of pro-Republican media bias, huge Republican cash backing their increasingly shrill and vicious ads, and despite the Rove-led efforts to brand Democrats as weak cowards.
As early as January, 2002, Rove encouraged Republicans to impugn Democrats' patriotism, using the terrorist threat to win votes. This has backfired badly. Rove's disgusting, divisive, dishonest campaign tactics -- ads comparing Democrats to Saddam Hussein and using the 9/11 tragedy to politicize national security -- turn the American stomach. Many Republicans are so ashamed of the Republican National Committee and GOP candidates they will support Democratic alternatives or just stay home.
Campaigns all across America show voters the clear choice between Republican reaction, right wing attacks on civil rights and costly compassionless conservative division vs. progress, political sanity, and sound American values offered by Democratic candidates nationwide.
Al Gore the real winner of the 2000 election has been campaigning for fellow Democrats. Speaking in Iowa, the man most Americans wanted for our president asked: "Are you over it?" They weren't. Gore added, "I want you to remember what you were feeling. The next time somebody says to you it doesn't make any difference who wins the election, remember all that has happened since." See: Gore Toughens Talk, Steve Gravelle, The Cedar Rapids, Iowa Gazette, October 14, 2002: http://www.crgazette.com/GCDA2/printable/0,1330,42969-1,00.html?cks=0.
Differences between the parties have never been more dramatic. Deeper than their positions on transient issues, the two offer profoundly different approaches to governance. Democrats are not perfect by any means, but they steadfastly support our constitutional republic. Republicans -- lionizing the illegitimate W. Bush -- embrace a fundamentally different ideology, a completely different system.
The old saying goes, "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." As the Republican Party relentlessly drives for absolute power, it betrays every American ideal and every one of its principles. As the ugly metamorphosis of the Republican Party from the proud legacy of Lincoln into an anti-republican travesty completes, Democrats offer the only sane, sensible choice.
© Copyright 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 by MikeHersh.com
and identified authors. MikeHersh.com invites you to broadcast
any material at this site, provided you identify the source as
MikeHersh.com. All print, Internet, email and other summaries, excerpts
or other written reproductions must
include this blurb and a link to http://www.MikeHersh.com.
|
