The New York Times reports that Democrats have awakened to the potential power of using national security as their issue, rather than ceding it to Republicans. It's about time.
As you no doubt noticed, immediately after Ned Lamont defeated Joe Lieberman last week, Republicans started painting him, and Democrats generally as virtual allies of al-Qaeda. (Lieberman, who still professes to be a Democrat, gleefully joined in.) There's no sign that this got much attention beyond the chattering classes (most voters are on vacation, at least from politics), but a Newsweek poll does show Bush's national-security rating up sharply from May--before the latest war in Lebanon and the alleged liquid-bomb plot in the UK.
Democrats should take a leaf from Karl Rove's playbook and make national-security not just an issue, but THE issue for the fall campaign. One advantage of doing so is that, because the presidency is not at stake, Democrats need only promise to ride herd on the administration (after all, they are a bunch of cowboys) and make it toe the line.
Democratic candidates might lead with questions like these:
HOW CAN REPUBLICANS SAY THAT THE WAR IN IRAQ MADE US SAFER? WAS THE LATEST LONDON BOMB PLOT DETERRED BY KNOCKING OUT SADDAM HUSSEIN?
DID WE TOPPLE SADDAM TO MAKE IRAQ AN ALLY OF IRAN?
HOW ARE WE STRONGER NOW THAT OUR MILITARY IS STRETCHED TO THE LIMIT AND MUCH OF THE WORLD SEE US AS UNABLE TO DEAL WITH A RAG-TAG BAND OF ENEMIES IN IRAQ?
WHY HAS THE REPUBLICAN CONGRESS KNUCKLED UNDER TO PRESSURE FROM THE CHEMICAL INDUSTRY, WHEN AN ATTACK ON ON CHEMICAL PLANT COULD EASILY KILL SEVERAL TIMES THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO DIED ON 9/11?
AL-QAEDA TRIED TO USE LIQUID EXPLOSIVES TO BLOW UP AIRLINERS IN 1995. WHY HAVEN'T WE PREPARED FOR ANOTHER ATTEMPT UNTIL NOW? WHY DID THE ADMINISTRATION TRY TO KILL $6 MILLION ALLOCATED TO DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGY TO DISCOVER LIQUID EXPLOSIVES?
and many, many more.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment