Last week, Salon’s Walter Shapiro spoke with several Dem insiders who lamented the fact that the party was going after Bush on his warrantless-search program, fearing that it would keep the political debate exactly where the White House wants it — with an emphasis on national security, Bush’s alleged strength.
The WaPo’s E. J. Dionne Jr., in the column of the day, explains that these insiders have everything backwards. Karl Rove has told the Dems where Republicans are going to go — the message is: “Republicans are tough on our enemies, Democrats are not. If you don’t want to get blown up, vote Republican” — and it’s up to Dems to deal with the telegraphed punch.
The typical Democratic consultant says: “Hey, national security is a Republican issue. We shouldn’t engage on that. We should change the subject.” In the 2002 elections, the surefire Democratic winners were a prescription drug benefit under Medicare (an issue Bush tried to steal), a patients’ bill of rights, the economy and education. Those issues sure worked wonders, didn’t they?
By not engaging the national security debate, Democrats cede to Rove the power to frame it. Consider that clever line about Democrats having a pre-Sept. 11 view of the world. The typical Democratic response would be defensive: “No, no, of course 9/11 changed the world.” More specifically, there’s a lot of private talk among Democrats that the party should let go of the issue of warrantless spying on Americans because the polls show that a majority values security and safety.
What Democrats should have learned is that they cannot evade the security debate. They must challenge the terms under which Rove and Bush would conduct it.
That’s exactly right. Too often, the refrain from Dems is, “But voters are with us on the issues.” To a real extent, this is largely true. But if the electorate thinks Bush and the GOP will do a better job than Dems in keeping the country safe, the other issues simply don’t matter nearly as much as the consultants would like.
The one part of this dynamic that’s so frustrating is Bush’s record on national security issues is really bad. I know, it’s a well-kept secret, but it’s true.
We’re talking about an administration that largely ignored Clinton’s advice about dealing al Qaeda; didn’t take the “bin Laden determined to strike inside U.S.” memo seriously; invaded Afghanistan but failed to follow through on our commitments; can’t catch bin Laden; launched a devastating war in Iraq that has increased the terrorist threat; watched the nuclear threat posed by North Korea and Iran get considerably worse; leaked classified information for partisan gain; and launched an illegal surveillance program that produced a flood of useless tips.
The only people who should be afraid of this record are Republicans who expect to run for re-election alongside this unpopular president. Dems have some compelling issues going for them — Abramoff and Medicare among them — but there’s no reason in the world to cede national security ground to the GOP.