Arkansas Democrat Gazette Endorses Hutchinson Campaign

Arkansas Democrat Gazette thru "Hutchinson for U.S. Senate" webpage ^ | Oct.20, 2002

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Arkansas Democrat Gazette Endorses Hutchinson Campaign Arkansas Democrat Gazette October 20, 2002 For Tim Hutchinson We know where he stands RULE NO. 2 in taking on an incumbent politician is: Explain why the voters should make a change. (Rule No. 1 is: Raise lotza money.) The principal argument Mark Pryor has made for unseating Senator Tim Hutchinson is this: My last name is Pryor. That may have been good enough for his father, but it isn't good enough for us. And it shouldn't be good enough for serious Arkansans, either. Even on the most important of issues, Mark Pryor just smiles his smile, awshucks his way through the question, and all but sketches imaginary circles on the floor in front of him with the toe of one shoe. It's almost as if he's counting on some kind of automatic voter reflex to put him in the United States Senate. (Ballot says Pryor, vote same.) Agree or disagree, Arkansans have the right to know where their senator stands on abortion. Mark Pryor was prochoice in 1998 when he ran for attorney general, or said he was. Now he says abortion is wrong but he wouldn't do anything to stop it. And while he's opposed to abortion personally, he thinks women should be able to abort their children. Well, sometimes. After all his talk, all we know is this: If Mark Pryor gets pregnant, he promises to have the baby. As attorney general, he aw-shucked his way past those payday loan lenders who take advantage of the least among us. He was satisfied to take their money and leave them to prey on the desperate. He also defended an unconstitutional law that branded homosexuals as criminals. And our attorney general showed even less backbone when it came to thoughtcrime. Maybe you remember that. Maybe not. We don't blame you if you don't. His rationalizations weren't worth remembering. But Attorney General Pryor once backed a hate-crime law for Arkansas. He said the bill would punish only conduct, not thought. Nice sound bite. But it made no sense. The proposed hate-crime law would have increased penalties for those who commit an offense if their thoughts were in the politically incorrect place. Beating up somebody over his race/color/ religion/gender/sexual orientation would have got you a 20 percent higher sentence. Beating up somebody else because of his class, dress, political affiliation or for just his wallet would get you a 20 percent discount. Thought had everything to do with it. That's why these laws are a species of what George Orwell called thoughtcrime. They create "protected classes" that divide ordinary victims from special ones. We ourselves would prefer to treat all criminals equally. And severely. Granted, our conversation with the attorney general on this issue got ridiculous at times, but that's what happens when an attorney general supports a ridiculous law. Our minds fog just thinking about it. We were thinking of that weird conversation when some simple, sensible thoughts intruded: Tim Hutchinson deserves a second term. Yes, there have been times when we didn't like how he voted or what he was saying, but we knew where he stood. And could understand it. He gave the conversation some traction. The senator is gaining in seniority, which helps small states like Arkansas in Congress. He's a solid supporter of the Second Amendment and gun rights. He's a member of the Armed Services, Veteran Affairs, and the Agriculture committees, among others. He has taken a consistent, principled stand on abortion. (He's agin.) And you never have to wonder what the heck he's trying to say. But, we've forgotten the most important reason of all to vote for Tim Hutchinson. It's more important than bringing home the bacon, more important than his opponent's non-answers to tough questions. The president needs Tim Hutchinson in the Senate. So do all those who value freedom abroad and a free market at home. This isn't to say Mark Pryor wouldn't lend W. a hand if it were the popular thing to do, as on issues like the War on Terror. He would. As long as the polls held up. But this president needs a Republican majority in the Senate to push through other legislation - like making his tax cuts permanent - and to approve judicial nominees now stuck in the long, long partisan pipeline. The 107th Congress is still sitting on dozens of judicial nominees, and it's tying up the court system in elaborate knots. (Strom Thurmond pert-near birthed a cat the other day when the Judiciary sat on one of his favorite nominees. But it was kind of fun to see the Senate's oldest member "ever" raise Cain with these 70-year-old whippersnappers.) The Homeland Security Bill is stuck in the mud, meaning the Senate. And in the next couple of years, a couple of vacancies could be opening on the Supreme Court of the United States. Who will fill those seats - a Scalia or a Ginsburg? A thinker or another vague mediocrity? The answer could determine the course of constitutional law for the next decade. Or more. Do the people of Arkansas want every nominee to kiss current Majority Leader Tom Daschle's ring before a vote? Mark Pryor could prove to be another arrow in Sen. Daschle's quiver. A vote for Tim Hutchinson could prove a vote for a much-needed new majority leader for the U.S. Senate. A Republican-controlled Senate could clear the way to exploration of oil drilling here at home, and that would mean less reliance on Middle Eastern mullahs. Other needed legislation is also knee deep in the Senate. A lot could depend on your vote November 5 th. (Or tomorrow, when early voting starts.) Will we reform the Social Security system, letting folks decide to invest a portion of their own money, or let the system get as close to bankruptcy as possible before rushing pell-mell to save it? You have a close race and some great issues in your hands, Mr. and Mrs. Arkansan. Lest we forget, at critical times like these, all politics is national. Every seat in a closely divided Senate is decisive. A smile, a familiar name, and a handshake shouldn't be enough to win your vote. Arkansas needs to send an experienced, principled senator, one with the president's ear, back to Washington.

[Theodore R.]

The late John G. Tower, the first Republican senator from the former Confederacy, was married three times -- twice or three times divorced, I can't recall. At no time did TX Republicans boycott the Tower candidacy. He was elected in 1961, 1966, 1972, and 1978. TX Republicans knew that they had no alternative but to stick with Tower or have no representation at all in the Senate. AR Republicans now face the same choice: Vote for Hutchinson or forfeit their representation in the U.S. Senate.

The Tower Senate seat is also on the ballot Nov. 5, and TX Republicans had better coalesce behind Attorney General John Cornyn, or this 41-year-Republican seat (one of the longest-held Republican Senate seats in the nation) will fall to the Daschle Democrats.

[WOSG]

It is not 'morality' but stupidity.

In this case, it seems that divorce is being treated as a grave moral offense. If he displays bad character I'd understand. But my sister left her hubbie and remarried, she's not a bad person. I dont see how this should be considered morally reprehensible. For those of us who have seen much WORSE from politicians and perhaps others in our lives, having someone who remarried is actually mild as an issue.

Remember he is a Public Servant -- a servant! Rule #1 is -- is he serving *you*, ie, will he represent your convictions, etc.

[Kuksool]

So, your Arkansas friend is disgusted with Tim Hutchinson's divorce & remarriage, and can't bring herself to vote for him. I wonder how she feels about other Christian celebrities who have done the same thing, like Amy Grant, Sandi Patti, & Michael English? Many Christians have adopted a "forgive & forget" attitude toward them. Why can't Christian conservatives in Arkansas do the same for Sen. Tim Hutchinson?

[muleboy]

None taken.

I can tell from some of the commentary on FR that an election is coming up in a couple of weeks and everyone is getting a bit tense and short-fused.

I have been tempted to post an "11th Commandment" post and bump it every day, just to remind all of us that now is the time to pull together.

During the next two weeks turnout will decide the balance of power in our government. I expect a historic amount of voter fraud from the Democrats because the margins are so thin and the issues so important.

Although I have a great deal enmity for many Republicans, I have universal loathing for Democrats.

Now is the time to work together. We can fight amongst ourselves the day after the election. The true signature of a "majority" party.

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

I'm not so sure. Posters are suggesting that one should set aside high moral standards to maintain a Republican Senate, affairs be damned.

I for one think your mother should stick to the high ground. I assume that since we are all sinners she just never votes for anyone?

In any case, God Bless us all.

[Lady In Blue]

Bumping for a later read. The Thune/Johnson debate is starting in a few minutes on C-Span.

[conservative_2001]

"A friend of mine who lives in Arkansas will not be voting for Hutchinson for the reasons you cited. She won't be voting for Pryor, but she cannot bring herself to vote for Hutchinson."

Your friend ought to try a new activity - minding her own business. Hutchinson and his wife divorced, it doesn't mean they're bad people. Only after the divorce did he become involved with his 2nd wife. There is no evidence that he ever cheated on his wife, and I'd be very surprised if it turned out that he did. People ought to keep their nose out of something that doesn't concern them.

Pryor is a weasel running on his daddy's name who will vote for Tom Daschle for speaker and vote the way he demands. Hutchinson is pro-life, supports the 2nd Amendment, will cut our taxes, and confirm conservative judges.

How many dead babies, confiscated guns, higher taxes, and rejected judicial nominees is worth it for your friend to claim the moral highground for voting against a guy for getting divorced.

[Catspaw]

Her vote is her business. If Hutchinson wanted her vote, he should've thought about it before he, as an elected public official, wanted to get re-elected after he hopped into bed with a much younger staffer. If he was a private citizen, she wouldn't have known and she wouldn't have cared what he does with his life. But he wants to be her Senator, and that's a BIG difference.

If we don't care what elected officials did, then we shouldn't have bothered to complain about the private life of one William Jefferson Clinton. We did. It's hypocrisy to say that Clinton was immoral and Hutchinson is not. The only difference between the two is that Hutchinson married his paramour. Clinton just masturbated in a sink.

[Catspaw]

Those Christian celebrities do not want to represent her state as a United States Senator. If Tim Hutchinson decides on a career in entertainment, let me know.

[Catspaw]

My mother draws the line at men who dump their wives for another woman while still married to those wives. (Also for women who dump their husbands for another man while still married to their husbands.) It's about the marriage vows and infidelity. If you can excuse that, good for you. She can't and she won't--and she doesn't have to.

Tim Hutchinson should've thought about this and gracefully resigned when this first broke a little less than two years ago. But he, in his arrogance, decided he was indisensible, despite his obvious moral failings. Statehouses are filled with ambitious politicians. Surely if Hutchinson had resigned, Huckabee could've found a good candidate of high moral character to appoint as Senator. But apparently, Hutchinson thought he could brazen it out. The blame lies on Hutchinson for not realizing that some people who voted for him the last time would not vote for him this time because of his own amoral behavior. It's his responsibility, not the voters. They had enough with Clinton as governor, then as a national embarassment as president, and then to have Hutchinson behave abominably--and STILL expect people to vote for him.

[Catspaw]

If Bob Dole did that & my mother knew (and I certainly wasn't going to tell her), she would not have voted for him. I am NOT going to tell her now. She's about to turn 80 and in fragile health.

[Lauratealeaf]

The only difference between the two is that Hutchinson married his paramour. Clinton just masturbated in a sink.

Only in a sink? Not on a Gap dress? You see no difference between the two? Now I am starting to get your drift. You wouldn't vote for a Republican because you are a Democrat. Go eat your Meow Mix. Or barf up a hair ball.

[conservative_2001]

"If Hutchinson wanted her vote, he should've thought about it before he, as an elected public official, wanted to get re-elected after he hopped into bed with a much younger staffer."

HELLO!! THIS NEVER HAPPENED UNTIL AFTER THE FREAKING DIVORCE. He got divorced, then found new love. People voting against Hutchinson over this are saying that all people who ever divorce are repulsive human beings. People who need to get their own damn life.

"If we don't care what elected officials did, then we shouldn't have bothered to complain about the private life of one William Jefferson Clinton."

Clinton cheated on his wife, and lied about it before a grand jury. Hutchinson got divorced. There's a big difference, that anyone who's nose isn't stuck far up someone else's business could understand.

"The only difference between the two is that Hutchinson married his paramour."

The difference is that Hutchinson and his wife divorced when their marriage became unreconcilable. Clinton cheated on his wife, stayed married and continued cheating on his wife. Again, get your nose out of the Hutchinson's family business and you'd see more clearly.

[conservative_2001]

"My mother draws the line at men who dump their wives for another woman while still married to those wives."

This never happened, but don't let facts get in your mother's way. It must feel real nice to make a great moral stand, even if you have to invent the sin.

Hutchinson and his wife's marriage was on the rocks starting back when he got elected to Congress. They finally divorced a few years later. THEN, he got involved with his next wife. To claim that he left his first wife for his 2nd is ignorant.

"My mother draws the line at men who dump their wives for another woman while still married to those wives."

Yeah, there's just a long line of great Arkansas Republicans. What a great candidate we had for Senate in 1998.

"The blame lies on Hutchinson for not realizing that some people who voted for him the last time would not vote for him this time because of his own amoral behavior."

If it was adultery that ruined the marriage, then it would be amoral, or immoral. But that's not what happened. The marriage broke up under it's own weight.

[DmBarch]

"My mother draws the line at men who dump their wives for another woman while still married to those wives." This never happened, but don't let facts get in your mother's way. It must feel real nice to make a great moral stand, even if you have to invent the sin. Hutchinson and his wife's marriage was on the rocks starting back when he got elected to Congress. They finally divorced a few years later. THEN, he got involved with his next wife. To claim that he left his first wife for his 2nd is ignorant.

This is exactly the same lie used against Ronald Reagan. "That he abandonded his his wife and kids for Nancy." The fact was they grew apart and were working apart as Movie stars in different locations. Jane Wyman couldn't live with the change in Reagan post-war about the importance of his ideas. So after many tries to reconcile, she filed for divorce.

When the divorce came through, the "abandoned" mother was doing a film in England, while Ronald, who had broken his leg in a charity baseball game, was at the beach house with the kids. It was still later, with Reagan still walking with a cane, that he first met Nancy Davis.

[Fledermaus]

A friend of mine who lives in Arkansas will not be voting for Hutchinson for the reasons you cited. She won't be voting for Pryor, but she cannot bring herself to vote for Hutchinson.

I find people like this to be irrational. They have blinders on. It's like, "well, I can't vote for the Devil, but I don't like Jesus' gun-control stance"!

Yet another good reason I left Arkansas in 1983 after 13 years. Univ of Ark alumni too! lol

[Fledermaus]

It really irritates me to hear people criticize Hutchinson because of his divorce. I suspect that many of those who do criticize him have done worse than that. Hypocrites.100% agreement there. I got sick of the "chruch people" I knew, when I went regularly, preaching to me about morals while everyone knew in town they were cheating on their spouses like crazy!!

[sweetliberty]

" I will say in their defense that while a few of us did shout warnings in 1992, nobody from Arkansas forced the rest of the country to make such a horrible mistake."

Touche!

[Darlin']

What a strong and witty endorsement. The Ark Democrat Gazette has a really fine editorial staff and have for years.

[kcvl]

Don't waste your time. Some people are clueless and take a stand based on NOTHING but rumors. Clinton could do no wrong but they can FIND something wrong with every other candidate just for an excuse to stay home.

If I based my vote on honest politicians or ones who didn't screw around I would NEVER vote.

BTW, I'll be crawling over hot coals and broken glass to cast my vote for Hutchinson.