SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (6365)8/31/2003 6:42:51 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793794
 
Hillary Clinton should join Dem race

August 31, 2003

BY MARK STEYN SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

Driving through Lebanon, N.H., the other day, I accidentally veered off on to the shoulder and just missed slamming into a huge billboard proclaiming, ''HOWARD DEAN--THE DOCTOR IS IN!'' Not the way I'd want to go.

But the sign's right. Dr. Dean is ''in.'' The Democratic presidential candidate is raising a ton of money on the Internet, and he's taking it in itsy-bitsy $20 donations, a rare distinction in a party that's become far too dependent on big contributions from a small number of wealthy donors. A presidential campaign has to have an element of romance, and right now Howard Dean is the only guy in the Democratic field providing any. Even those of us who've spent enough time watching him govern Vermont to dismiss him as a mean, thin-skinned, low-down, unprincipled, arrogant no-good have to salute the canniness he's shown in running his presidential campaign.

A year ago, no one outside New England had heard of him, and the famous fellows were all the senators--Joe Lieberman, John Kerry. Now everyone's heard of Dean, and Lieberman and Kerry are getting more obscure by the hour. With the California recall election sucking all the attention away from the presidential midgets for the next month and a half, these fellows will be lucky if they're still in the game at all by Oct. 8.

All this was predictable. In the modern era, governors make the best candidates and senators the worst. The trouble with Bill Clinton's Democratic Party is that by the end of his personality-cult presidency it had so declined at all other levels that it controlled the governor's mansion in almost no big states except California. And no one wants Gray Davis running for president right now. So the pool of viable Democrats able to run from the governor's mansion shrunk to Howard Dean of Vermont, a state so modest its governor doesn't even get a mansion.

As I said a couple of months back, Dean's on course to kill off two big-time rivals in the first two votes: Dick Gephardt in Iowa, John Kerry in New Hampshire. By Jan. 27, he could be the nominee. In the last week or two, he's started behaving like he already is. Dean's suddenly ceased pandering to the party's anti-war base, and begun equivocating his way back to the center. Meanwhile, the previously relatively sensible candidates he's tugged to the left over the last few months are now beached out on the fringe: Sen. Bob Graham of Florida, a hitherto sober chap with a solid foreign policy reputation, was last heard of threatening to impeach Bush over Iraq.

If you're a Democrat--and there are still a few around--what's the best thing to do? I wouldn't myself want to run on a platform that's soft on war, big on taxes and either weaselly evasive or excessively enthusiastic about gay marriage. But, on the other hand, if you're going to lose, what difference does it make? So here's the first scenario: If you think Bush is unbeatable (as incumbents generally are), then it's just a question of picking out who you want to nosedive into oblivion with. Going for, say, Dick Gephardt, the terminally dull congressman who's been around way too long, would guarantee you a genteel, respectable defeat--like Bob Dole in 1996. But, if you're going to flop anyway, wouldn't it be more fun--and maybe better for the long-term health of your party--to take a flier on Dean?

And that brings us to the second possibility: What if Bush is at least potentially vulnerable? Despite the Democrats' most fervent prayers, the economy refuses to collapse. But it's a pretty freaky world out there, and who knows what else might happen in the next 14 months? A safe choice like Gephardt is a certain bet for narrow defeat. But with Dean, who can say? It might be a McGovern-scale wipeout. But not necessarily. As the motto of Britain's special forces, the SAS, puts it: ''Who Dares Wins.'' Next to all those cautious senators, Howard Dean has been the most daring of Democrats so far, and he's succeeded in defining the primary campaign on his terms. Who's to say he couldn't do the same with the general election?

Which brings us to the third scenario: What if you seriously believe that Bush is defeatable? Who's the best candidate to do that? Dean? Hmm. Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO supreme commander and lion of Kosovo, currently playing electoral footsie with the Dems? I don't think so. The one to watch is the candidate who polls better than any other against the incumbent: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The Clintons didn't get where they are without being bold: No experts thought Bush Sr. could lose in '92, but an obscure Arkansas governor did; no experts thought a sitting first lady could run for office, but Hillary did. They had plenty of luck: Ross Perot vote-splitting in '92, and the pre-9/11 Rudy Giuliani going into emotional meltdown in 2000. But fortune favors the brave, and if Hillary was to shoot for the big one, I wouldn't be surprised if some equally unforeseen breaks go her way.

The way to look at it is like this: What does she have to gain by waiting four years? If Bush wins a second term, the Clinton aura will be very faded by 2008. And, if by some weird chance Bush loses to a Howard Dean, she's going to have to hang around till 2012. Logic dictates that, if Hillary wants to be president, it's this year or none. In her reflexive attacks on Bush over the war and the blackout and everything else, she already sounds like a candidate. The press will lapse into its familiar poodle mode (''Do you think you've been attacked so harshly because our society still has difficulty accepting a strong, intelligent woman?'' etc.). And, more to the point, when the party's busting to hand you the nomination, you only get one opportunity to refuse.

Realistically, Hillary has to decide in the next eight weeks. If the meteoric rise of Howard Dean has stalled by then, the answer's obvious. And, even if it hasn't, you need an awful lot of $20 Internet donations to counter a couple of checks from Barbra Streisand. This is Hillary's moment. You go, girl.

Copyright © The Sun-Times Company
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (6365)9/1/2003 8:35:15 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793794
 
In case anybody wondered how the Brits play Pal/Israeli articles

Israeli assassins kill hopes of peace for Palestinians

Conal Urquhart in Gaza City
Sunday August 31, 2003
The Observer/Guardian

Two Palestinians were killed and others wounded yesterday in the latest Israeli assassination attack on Hamas members in the Gaza Strip.

The men died after an Apache helicopter gunship fired four missiles at a van on a road between two refugee camps in central Gaza. Initial reports said at least two bystanders were injured. Hospital officials identified the dead as Farid Mlayet, 21, and Abdullah Akel, 24, and Hamas sources said both were members of the Hamas military wing. It was the fourth Israeli attack in the 11 days since the Palestinian suicide bombing of a Jerusalem bus which killed 21 people.

Israel's open season on Hamas militants has forced the Islamic group in Gaza underground for the first time since the Palestinian Authority's 1996 crackdown on it. Over the past 10 days, Israel has killed Ismail Abu Shenab, the most moderate Hamas leader, nine activists and two bystanders; Hamas has declared its ceasefire, kept since June, over; and Israeli officials have declared all Hamas members to be assassination targets.

Hamas has decided to lie low. Last week a seven-point survival leaflet was distributed, telling Hamas 'brothers' that they are targets and should assume all telephone conversations are monitored, and that Israeli spies are all around. Vehicles should be used only in an emergency.

The death of Abu Shenab has radicalised Hamas, ironically suppressing the ideas for which he stood, and put Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas - known as Abu Mazen and recently regarded as the man to carry forward the US-backed road map - in a position described yesterday as 'clinically dead'.

Imad Falouji, an independent member of the Palestinian parliament who left Hamas in the 1990s when it refused to take part in elections, said that Israeli violence would only make Hamas stronger and more extreme. 'People have greater sympathy for them and the movement is growing all the time,' he said.

'There are two wings in Hamas. The first believes the only language the Israelis understand is the language of blood. The second was led by Abu Shenab and it believed in the possibilities of dialogue and negotiation. Now the second group is silenced and the extreme line has been vindicated by Israel's actions.'

Two weeks ago it was easy to find Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders. Last week the office of Mohammad al-Hindi, leader of Islamic Jihad, was closed and his mobile was turned off. Abel Aziz Rantisi, a Hamas leader who survived an Israeli assassination attempt last month, was at his Gaza City home but said he would not be giving interviews or leaving his home. The Palestinian Authority's police are patrolling areas used by Hamas to fire rockets into Israel, and the Palestinian Monetary Authority has frozen 36 bank accounts belonging to Islamic charities linked to Hamas.

However, analysts in Gaza and Ramallah believe the main victim of the Israeli attacks and international pressure is Abbas and his policy of non-violence and negotiation. Abbas has asked the Palestinian parliament to give him a vote of confidence tomorrow, but in Gaza on Thursday hundreds protested against his decision to freeze the charities' accounts. Even his supporters say that this action affects only the poor.

Hamas has now added a new dimension to its fight. Last week Kassam rockets hit the Israeli coastal city of Ashkelon. The range of Hamas rockets has been extended up to eight miles.

There is little interest in restraint now in Gaza. Falouji said: 'People see the Hamas belief that Israel understands only the language of blood is true. The biggest loser is the Israeli people. Before they were safe because the Palestinians guaranteed their safety. That guarantee has gone, and now they are all wondering where the next Hamas strike will hit.'
observer.guardian.co.uk