Batfink's Beep -- 12-28-05

No kidding

December 28, 2005

It seems that certain greybeards in the Democrat party are starting to realize that the current party line on the NSA warrantless search issue and subsequent filibuster of the Patriot Act, well, isn't exactly what the doctor ordered for a party that has the weak-on-national-security monkey on its back, going into an election year.

Fortunately, the people that say this are from the DLC, and national party poobahs Dean, Reid, and Pelosi are not likely to turn around and start giving them credence any time soon. This is a good thing, because the DLC are the folks who at least knew politics well enough to get Clinton elected twice, and as a Republican, I'd rather face the party that lost seats in both chambers of Congress in all 3 of their elections since becoming the out-party, including the off-year one, than the party that at least knew how to fool people into thinking they were on our side.

But, setting that aside for now, let's have a look at what is being said by those worried folks. Michael O'Hanlon, a national security analyst at the Brookings Institution who advises Democrats on defense issues, says:

I think when you suggest that civil liberties are just as much at risk today as the country is from terrorism, you've gone too far if you leave that impression. I don't believe that's true...I get nervous when I see the Democrats playing this [civil liberties] issue out too far. They had better be careful about the politics of it.

For good measure, Mr. O'Hanlon goes on to say that the Patriot Act is "good legislation."

Says Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster and former adviser to President Clinton, who co-authored a Democratic Leadership Council memo on the party's national-security weaknesses, "The Republicans still hold the advantage on every national-security issue we tested." The memo went on to say that "In shaping alternative policies -- particularly on national security, terrorism and Iraq -- Democrats have to be extremely careful to avoid reinforcing the negative stereotype that has cost us so much in the last two national elections."

As I suggested earlier, I was rather hoping that this line of reasoning wouldn't occur to the Democrats any time soon, but not to worry -- the wisdom being peddled by the DLC is being resisted by others besides the Dean/Reid/Pelosi asylum. Said Bill Galston, a one-time Clinton White House adviser who ought to know better,

"The Democrats' vulnerability on national security is not a new problem, but standing up for civil liberties and the Constitution will not make the problem worse and, besides, it's the right thing to do. In standing up for civil liberties and the rule of law, Democrats are not undermining the party's standing on national security."

As Republicans, let's hope those who will run the 2006 campaign are smoking the same stuff as Mr. Galston.

top

Visitors since Dec 1, 2005:

Revised: 05/19/08 08:07:01 -0400 .