Archive [August 1999]

On July 22, Democrat presidential hopeful Algore stood in all his majesty on the banks of the Connecticut River in Cornish, New Hampshire. He described early memories growing up by Tennessee waterways, and talked about his children. He claimed that’s what inspired him to recommend to President Clinton the American Heritage Rivers Initiative. Since the Connecticut had just become an official American Heritage River, candidate Gore was handing out $819,000 in federal money. It gave him a priceless opportunity to take a brave stand in favor of clean water.

“To me,” he intoned, “these are more than public policy issues; they are moral issues. We have to make the 21st century the time we right the environmental wrongs of the past.”

Of course, no one will remember any of that. What they will remember is what happened just before the speech.

The Vice President had canoed down the river with fellow Democrat New Hampshire Governor Jeanne Shaheen. Others, including John Kassel, director of the Vermont Department of Natural Resources, went along. It was a nice outing, an uneventful paddle — made possible by the fact that four billion gallons of water had been released into the river that morning. Just for Algore. And the cameras.

Yes, that’s right — the Secret Service had asked local utility officials to raise the river level so the canoes wouldn’t hit bottom. Apparently the natural depth of this great American Heritage River is not sufficient to keep Algore afloat, and the Secret Service ordered up a fix. Billions of gallons were released from a dam, and the river rose 8 inches. Hours after the Environmental Vice President left the area, the Connecticut — and nature in general — went back to normal.

The whole affair apparently did not set well with Mr. Kassel, and the next day The Washington Times had the story. “They won’t release the water for the fish when we ask them to, but somehow they find themselves able to release it for a politician,” Kassel told The Times. The story made the wires, and by the weekend, everyone in Washington was yukking it up. “The only reason they did this was to make sure the Vice President’s canoe didn’t get stuck,” said Kassel.

Naturally, many who heard this story instantly pictured the one thing the Gore team had been trying to avoid: Algore’s canoe … stuck in the mud, a perfect image for his hapless presidential campaign. Others joked about the 4 billion gallons needed to flush him downstream, and immediately went to “South Park” themes.

Folks, as I have always told you: you live by the photo op … you die by the photo op. And, my friends, they’re dying by the photo op. Take your pick: fake environmentalist Algore, kept afloat by Secret Service order — or fake New Yorker Hillary Clinton, a Yankees baseball cap squashing her hairdo.

This is not going as planned.

I cannot overemphasize for you the icy pall of fear that is settling over the Democrat camp. It began as a small chill in response to the rumble of distant thunder over a year ago, with Gore’s consistently low poll numbers. During the impeachment flap, there was even the odd survey question here and there that suggested a widespread wariness of Algore may have been one reason Americans didn’t want Bill Clinton thrown out of office. But that was dismissed. Who believes polls, anyway? And besides, the pundits said, it was early; there was still plenty of time for Gore to catch fire.

Still, among party officials, there has been a sense of unease for months. They are the ones who know full well that the Gore rallies, events, and photo-ops don’t draw, that the crowds have to be bussed in. They were the ones whispering amongst themselves, off camera, away from the media, that the Gore campaign felt like a dud. But true, out-in-the-open, full-blown Democrat party panic began on June 30, with news reports of the candidates’ second quarter FEC fundraising figures.

Algore had raised $18 million. When it turned out that Gov. George W. Bush had not raised $20 million as anticipated, but had actually raised $36.3 million, you could hear the sharp intake of breath from all of official Washington. Literally. CNN’s Candy Crowley reported that “the number drew gasps.” The Hotline summarized the media response: Bush’s $36 million was “astounding”; “staggering”; “jaw-dropping”; “extraordinary”; “unprecedented.” And it “astonished onlookers”; “shattered records”; “shattered expectations”; “dropped a bomb.”

The typical liberal response was that this wasn’t fair. Rep. Barney Frank (D, MA) complained: “What this means is that George Bush will have a significant advantage that I believe in a democracy shouldn’t exist, and I think that’s unfortunate.” Boo-hoo.

For all of you who resent the George W. Bush phenomenon — and you know who you are — stay with me here. I am presenting this chronology in order to give you an accurate picture of the tattered and pathetic state of Democrat morale. No matter what your opinion of Governor Bush, my astute analysis of the facts will help you correctly assess the political dynamic. And it is unarguable that the politics of the 2000 race were completely transformed by the June 30 fundraising numbers.

On that day, the Democrats suddenly saw what they were up against. This financial report instantly clarified for them, as nothing before had, just how dramatically the political landscape had changed.

For months they had sweet-talked themselves into believing that the American public was standing in solidarity with the Democrats — on impeachment, on entitlements, on the environment. They had handed Americans a pile of useful readymade slogans: “So what?” “It’s all about sex.” “Let’s move on.” But when the smoke of the Clinton years had started to clear, it was the public that had moved on … away from the Democrats.

National Public Radio’s Mara Liasson reported on the White House reaction to Bush’s $36 million: “They are stunned, too. And one of the things the Democrats said to me today is what amazed them was how easy it is for Republicans to raise money. I mean, they don’t have to go to Buddhist temples; they don’t have to go to great lengths.”

This is what surprised them: Republicans are not hated.

It hit them like a ton of bricks. Like a punch in the gut. Like a cold bucket of water thrown on the Wicked Witch of the West. We’re talking nightmare scenario, friends: all three branches of government, controlled by the eeeevil right-wing extremists. Oh, what a world, what a world…

Desperate times, of course, call for desperate measures. The New York Times reports that the Democrats have decided: fine, we’ll raise $200 million in soft money by November 2000. The Times helpfully explains: “Soft money refers to large contributions from labor unions, corporations, and wealthy individuals that fall outside the limits of Federal election law.” So, the shakedowns begin — again. The cheating begins — again. The coffees begin — again. And, of course, there are always the Chi-Coms.

But the Democratic party’s appetite to amass a record amount of soft money could come back to bite them. The Times points out that “the Democrats’ aggressive soft-money drive places the party and its eventual nominee in a politically awkward, possibly vulnerable position. President Clinton, Vice President Al Gore and former Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey have all called on Congress to ban soft money as part of a far-reaching overhaul of the campaign-finance system.” Ah, hypocrisy.

I am delighted to report, it’s a mess! Gore and Bradley have already gotten into a spat over this issue. In a speech, Bradley charged: “Both [Gore and Bush] reportedly have directed their top fundraisers to begin raising soft money to the general election. Before the money machine starts humming, let’s pause and think about a better way.”

Gore campaign chairman Tony Coelho condemned Bradley: “Al Gore long ago issued the call to end soft money and kept working for real reform long after Bill Bradley abandoned the Senate for private life and $2 million in special-interest speaking and consulting fees.” Oooooh! How divisive.

In fact it appears at this writing that the Gore campaign has completely forgotten to run against the Republicans, and is trying to go one-on-one with Bill Bradley.

Perhaps that’s because there’s a whole lot of Bradley flirtation goin’ on out there. Westchester County (NY) Democratic Chair David Alpert called Gore a “stuffed shirt,” characterizing Bill Bradley as “more electable.” On CNBC’s “Hardball,” former Lyndon Johnson aide Clifford Alexander called Bradley “a righteous candidate.” And former Democratic pollster Pat Caddell put it straight: “I think Gore is in deep trouble right now, even potentially in the primary.” Which was seconded by Hotline Editor-in-Chief Craig Crawford, appearing on the NBC “Nightly News”: “It is going to be difficult for the Gore campaign to take many more body blows like this before a lot of talk in Democratic circles that, maybe we ought to think about Bradley as the nominee.”

And if those are the comments that make the media, you can only imagine the kind of stuff that’s being said behind the scenes. The Democrat party operatives are not happy. They know that at this stage, a strong primary challenge guarantees them a considerably weaker nominee.

And it’s not just Bradley flirtation; it’s cash. A surprising number of Democrat contributors are going Bradley. According to The Los Angeles Times, an analysis of Bradley contributors by the Campaign Study Group found the jobs held by Bradley donors are lawyers and financiers, many with “powerhouse Wall Street firms.” This was not supposed to happen. A Gore strategist complained: “Bradley is theoretically running a campaign of the small people that are supposed to be anti-Washington and anti-establishment…Yet when you take a look at his contributions and contributor list, it reeks of the establishment.” In other words, “Hey, that was supposed to be our dough.”

But Bradley is clearly striking home — and striking gold. Flush with cash and thus being taken seriously, he is enjoying taking potshots at the current Administration: “[The economy] isn’t enough. It’s not improving our schools, healing our racial divides, nurturing our children or inspiring our society to listen to our better angels. The reason, I believe, is that economic might is no substitute for the character of true leadership. And that is what this election is all about.” In a fundraising letter, Bradley said he’s aiming at “restoring the badly damaged bond of trust between the people and their President.”

Character? Trust? Democrats are responding with their checkbooks. That wasn’t supposed to happen, either.

Don’t worry, says Gore spokesperson Roger Salazar: “We’re on target with what we need to raise. We’re going to raise what we need to get the Vice President’s message out.” Get his message out?? Where have we heard that before?

The problem is, Gore has tried to get traction with various issues. He started with urban sprawl. Nobody cared. Then he went for God, morality, and family values. People said, “You’ve got to be kidding.” Polls suggested he would do well to “distance himself” from Bill Clinton. When he criticized the President’s behavior, the President was miffed, and the public said, “Oh, please.” He was running on the strong economy, and then the President went on a Poverty Tour.

Not to mention the fact that a recent report by the White House Office of Management and Budget states that “the economic expansion that began in April 1991 is now the second-longest on record,” forcing Gore to quietly acknowledge that the current economic boom began midway through the Bush Administration — which he once called “the worst economy in 50 years.”

So he decided to run on his greatest “strength,” the environment. Some genius on his campaign staff said, “Hey. I know — let’s get him in a canoe, on the Connecticut River!”

I do hope that a little 4-billion-gallon glitch won’t prevent him from continuing to run on the environment. I want someone to ask him about these quotes (every word of which he still stands by, he says) from his 1992 book Earth in the Balance, or, as I call it, Earth in the Lurch:

• “We must make the rescue of the environment the central organizing principle for civilization.”
• “Complacency has allowed many kinds of difficult problems to breed and grow, but now, facing a rapidly deteriorating global environment, it threatens absolute disaster.”
• “The insistence on complete certainty about the full details of global warming — the most serious threat that we have ever faced — is actually an effort to avoid facing the awful, uncomfortable truth.”
• “Research in lieu of action is unconscionable … The theory of global warming will not be disproved.”

And of course, my favorite, that the greatest threat to the planet is the internal combustion engine.

Now that I have swerved into scientific subject matter, I think it only appropriate that I here quote Jesse Jackson, who on CNBC’s “Russert,” said this: “Gore has been a decent and an honorable guy. At this point he’s having problems connecting with the people, which is a spiritual, chemical thing. He has to keep working on that.”

A spiritual, chemical thing. I wonder if Bill Clinton can help.

Which reminds me — Clinton and Gore haven’t been getting along. But they’re trying to work it out. According to The Washington Post, the two camps are working “on a strategy designed to take full advantage of the President’s political skills while minimizing the drag that his tainted image might place on Gore’s presidential hopes.”

Clinton will have vitally important tasks to do for Algore. First of all, raising money. (Although his prowess has slipped; according to a little-noticed sentence in The New York Times: “Mr. Clinton has also agreed to headline more fundraising events for the DNC as part of its soft-money drive, but fundraisers say his drawing power has ebbed in recent weeks because he is perceived to be a lame duck.”)

Second, he is supposed to be “touting the nation’s robust economy.” Well, I guess he can do that again now that his Poverty Tour is over.

Third, the President will be “encouraged to poke fun at” George W. Bush.

An amazing plan! Of course, the first time Clinton “poked fun at” Gov. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism,” he took a lot of heat. He appeared mean-spirited, and Bush swatted him rather deftly, I thought, with this retort: “Which word didn’t he understand — ‘compassionate’? Or ‘conservative’?” Game, set, match.

It’s obvious that Bill Clinton can feel it all slipping away. He sees that his chosen heir, Algore, isn’t cutting it. He recognizes that his pardon insurance is severely in jeopardy. So Clinton is trying, desperately, to replay the same old tunes that worked for him in the past — painting the Republicans as malicious marauders who poison the water, starve children, and throw old people into the street.

He said the Republicans’ 10-year, $792 billion tax-cutting plan would “imperil the future stability of the country.” In a radio address, he said: “Their reckless tax plan would threaten law enforcement across the board, forcing reductions in the number of federal agents and cutting deeply into support for state and local law enforcement.”

But friends, for the first time, it did not resonate. Nobody believes him.

So Clinton tried to turn the subject back to himself. In Aspen, hobnobbing with wealthy Democrat donors, he said: “After telling everybody for 6 1/2 years what a bad guy I was, [the Republicans are] now basically saying, ‘Oh, well, you know, Bill Clinton is like Michael Jordan, he just jumps higher than the other guys.’”

Clinton said the Republicans hope that when he’s gone, they can put the Democrats “in the cellar again.” Yeah, Mike. Whatever.

Can you sense it? America has no more stomach for this bunch. The proclamations of all the luminaries of this sorry Administration — Joe Lockhart, Janet Reno, Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, yes, even Tipper — all fall on deaf ears. They have the credibility of flying monkeys, doing the bidding of their master, and no more.

I think a growing number of Americans seem to instinctively recognize that we cannot survive more liberalism. And they intend to douse it, for good.

Do not underestimate the Democratic party’s capacity for deceit. And do not ever underestimate the left. But … the spell is breaking. Finally.