|
|
 |

Remember Viet Nam? Remember how liberals marched in the streets, waved the Viet Cong flag, and gave aid and comfort to the North Vietnamese?
Remember the 1970s and ‘80s, when liberals opposed the Strategic Defense Initiative, invasion of Grenada, aid to freedom fighters in Nicaragua, and peace through strength.
Remember the Gulf War in 1991? Liberals in the Senate predicted a blood bath, prophesied 100,000 body bags, and criticized American troops even after they’d been deployed.
Ask yourself: How long’s it been since liberals supported America abroad? Can’t remember. Name the last time they stood tall behind U.S. troops fighting around the world. Can’t. Neither can most Americans. That’s why polls show Republicans trusted by 5-1 over Democrats in foreign policy.
I mention this because recently Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle criticized our war against terrorism. He said, “I think there is expansion without clear direction. The jury is still out.” I wonder how our troops abroad feel about being second-guessed -- or terrorists feel about liberals again undermining U.S. resolve. We often say of the French, “But don’t ask them to win a war.” It’s true of liberals, too.
Is there life after the White House? Bill Clinton must wonder. Today he’s remembered chiefly for wooing Monica and letting Osama get away. According to George Gallup, 39 percent of Americans name George W. Bush their most admired American. Clinton doesn’t make the list. What’s striking is how many ex-Clinton aides hope that his malaise doesn’t afflict them, too.
This year a full half-dozen Clinton cabinet officers and advisers are running for office. None had asked Clinton to campaign for them. Their literature doesn’t mention him. On the campaign trail by and large they forget to drop his name. The only thing they drop is him.
In North Carolina, former White House chief of staff Erskine Bowles, running for the Senate, treats Clinton like a bad tobacco crop. In New York, his HUD Secretary, Andrew Cuomo, touts the Clinton Administration but not his boss. Janet Reno, running for Governor of Florida, ignores Clinton like she did Elia Gonzalez. Even in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, Robert Reich, Clinton’s Labor secretary, ignores his liberal president. Where can you sell Clinton if you can’t sell him there? The former President worries about his legacy. This year his legacy is becoming The Forgotten Man.
Ted O’Brien is Monroe County Democratic chairman. He is also my twice-weekly duelist on WROC Television’s “Talking Point.” Ted is not always right -- believing, as he does, that Big Government means Good Government. He’s right, though about who his party should run for Governor. Will his party take the hint?
Recently, O’Brien announced he will support State Comptroller Carl McCall against Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic Primary. Other local politicos to back him include Mayor Johnson, Assemblyman David Gantt, and Senator Rick Dollinger.
McCall is black. But forget about his playing the race card. He has a better calling card. It’s called electability. A Quinnipaic University poll shows Cuomo leading McCall, 40-35 percent, among Democrats. It doesn’t indicate McCall’s far greater appeal among Republicans and Independents.
I am not sure McCall can beat Governor Pataki. I am sure that Cuomo can’t -- too abrasive, mean, too haunted by his father’s memory. I think that O’Brien shares that view -- which is why you can expect to see more Democrats back McCall. In politics, there’s no worse four-letter word than lose.
In 1920, the liberal journalist Lincoln Steffens visited the Soviet Union and predicted an absurdity. “I have seen the future,” he said, “and it works.” Recently the two leading Democratic candidates for Texas Governor held a debate in Dallas. If this is our future, give me a one-way ticket to the past.
The two candidates were Tony Sanchez, a Laredo millionaire, and Dan Morales, a former Attorney General. Both are Hispanic, is heavily Hispanic Texas. So far, so good. What made their debate nauseous is that it was held in Spanish -- the first non-English debate, in U.S. history, between candidates for Governor.
We Americans don’t have a Royal family to unite us. We have the English language. It is our bond, umbilical cord, and incidentally, an immigrant child’s best hope. Without it we become a babble of warring tribes -- each out for itself, hostile to others, and unable to conceive a greater good. Welcome to Texas Democrats.
One of the candidates, Morales, seemed to grasp this, accusing Sanchez of trying to divide voters by race, ethnicity, and language by insisting in an equal number of English and Spanish debates. “This is Texas,” he said, “and in Texas we speak English as our primary language.” Any other future will never work.
Diversity. What a mindless, endless, ceaseless chant. It’s become the mantra of the ultra left -- a thinly veiled attack on all that is white, middle class, and Christian. Like most frauds, its disciples oversell.
New York is supposedly one of America’s most diverse states. Everyone’s a minority; no culture trumps. Except that that’s a lie, as shown by a recent CNN exit poll of the 2000 election. The New York Times touts all the news that’s fit to print. Here’s some news you need to hear.
According to CNN, 78 percent of New York voters in 2002 were white. You heard me: 78, or 4 in 5. Eleven percent were black, 8 percent Hispanic, and 2 Asian. In the diverse Empire State, it’s the white middle class that decides who wins.
Among exit voters, 40 percent were Catholic, and 32 Protestant. Got that? In a state obsessed by diversity, nearly 3 in 4 voters are Christian. Fourteen percent were Jewish, 9 none, 6 other. What all this means is simple: Whoever wants to win in the Empire State had best get the guy who goes to church, pays his taxes, and wants safe streets for his kids.
The press genuflects before a left-wing Rainbow Coalition. The facts, though, make its color black and blue.
Want to express your opinion on these topics to Curt? Click here.
|
 |