Posted on 05/09/2003 1:01:49 PM PDT by LdSentinal
Every so often you come across evidence that a political party is losing its mind. Something like that is happening to Democrats over President Bush's fabulous "Top Gun" photo-op aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln. It's a case study in how Bush and Karl Rove have left so many Democrats undone.
Rep. Henry Waxman of California has asked the General Accounting Office to provide a full accounting of the landing's costs, since the event had "clear political overtones."
Sen. Robert Byrd, who as longtime appropriations czar is in no position to throw stones over dubious uses of taxpayer money, lashed out at Bush instead for "flamboyant showmanship," saying the White House had no business using the carrier "as an advertising backdrop" for the president's speech.
Democratic staffers are working overtime to gin up media interest in the "scandal."
Let's be clear. Yes, Bush manipulated the timing of the Iraqi showdown to suit his purposes in last year's midterm elections. And yes, he's now hoping to use America's military success to his political advantage.
But for all that, Bush's decision to take out Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do. And as for the news that Bush is now trying to use the result to help himself -- well, do we really have to trot out the old Casablanca line about being shocked to find there's gambling going on here?
For foes of Bush's domestic agenda, like myself, the worst part of these Democratic attacks is how ineffective and tone-deaf they are.
The party's most idiotic argument (it's hard to find a gentler word that's also accurate) is that, in staging this event, Bush showed disrespect for the troops because he delayed their return to their families by an extra day after a 10-month deployment.
Isn't it obvious even to Democrats that if you took a vote of the sailors on board, they'd have unanimously hailed the idea of a visit from their commander in chief to deliver the thanks of a grateful nation?
It's a moment they'll cherish for the rest of their lives and tell their grandchildren about. Democrats, inspired perhaps by the trial lawyers who bankroll the party, are acting as if these troops are good prospects for a class-action suit.
The cost was puny anyway. Early Democratic salvos complained that the photo-op cost at least $100,000, as if we should be outraged. Reality check, please. Fifty million dollars for Kenneth Starr's investigation was an outrage; $100,000 to land on deck and welcome troops returning from war is patriotic pag-eantry.
Earth to Democrats: There is nothing wrong with a little patriotic pageantry. And the costs of presidential movements are always extraordinary. When a president changes where he eats a meal one afternoon, taxpayers probably drop $100,000. You know what? We give the head of the free world a budget for that.
Democrats, of course, know this. Which helps explain why, as I write this, I've already received fresh e-mails from a Democratic press office raising the cost estimate for Top-Gun-Gate to $1 million. Bet they'll get it to $10 million before week's end.
I know, I know -- this is politics.
GOP operatives routinely toted up the cost of Bill Clinton's trips to New York City and the man-hours lost to Manhattan gridlock in the service of Hillary's ambition. The right wing never tires of trotting out the size and cost of Clinton's entourage when he traveled abroad.
Both sides perennially engage in this irrelevant nitpicking -- like so many other depressing aspects of public life, this seems to be a political law of nature.
But this latest episode shows how demoralizing life in the minority must be. Henry Waxman is admired even by Republicans for having done more over his career to extend health coverage to poor and near-poor Americans than perhaps anyone in the country.
Now look: Ten years after Newt Gingrich's earthquake, poor Henry is sniping guerrilla-style over political sideshows. How depressing must that be?
This is no time for Democrats to go bonkers over the small stuff. If this is what they consider smart politics, it'll be a long wait until 2008.
Where was Henry when Bill Clinton made his $100,000,000 pilgrimage to pay homage to his Chinese benefactor, Jiang Zhemin?
Talk about "clear political overtones."
Choke, cough, hack, hack, spit, vomit, choke, cough, hack.
Whew, coming from a former Clinton staffer, that had to be a hard line to write.
NO way is this guy a democrat.
What is he talking about? This administration was getting yanked around by the UN on Iraq last November.
Oh, he made Congress vote on the issue just prior to the elections. Just exactly what is wrong with that? Aren't congressmen supposed to be accountable. Don't voters have a right to know exatcly where they stand on the issues especially the most important life or death issue of whether or not to go to war. Lots of congressment wanted to complain about not being consulted before going to war so President Bush consulted them just before the election, and had them vote. Lots of congressmen just want to pass pork for their home districs, but really don't want to have to be accountable for any stand on any controversial issue. Tough $%!&!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.