HOW HE SEES IT Can Dems take defense from GOP?
By E. THOMAS McCLANAHAN
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS
I almost feel sorry for Al From, the mild-mannered head of the centrist Democratic Leadership Conference. Some of the political wares he's peddling would do wonders for his party, but he's not having much luck making the sale.
From has been urging Democrats to reclaim the strong-defense legacy of Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy.
Such a shift is imperative for Democrats, who are perceived by many voters as soft on national security. With the nation facing a "long war" against terrorism, any Democrat seeking the White House in 2008 will have to be credible on this pivotal issue.
The question is whether Democrats can cast off their McGovern-era, anti-war baggage. From recognizes that the political health of Democrats depends on accepting that the war on terror -- and Iraq -- is fundamentally different from Vietnam.
The DLC agrees with President Bush that premature withdrawal from Iraq would be a disaster for the United States. The group bashes Bush for what it calls his "utterly inept" handling of the war but does not conclude that because things have gone poorly, it's time to pull out.
Instead, the group suggests that what Democrats "should demand from President Bush is victory."
Whoa. If Democrats began making that sort of argument, American politics would be thoroughly upended.
In addition, Democrats attacking Bush from that direction would not be vulnerable if the U.S. mission in Iraq actually succeeds. Many Democrats have become so convinced that defeat in Iraq is inevitable, they haven't thought through the implications of a more positive scenario.
Yet consider the last few days: al-Zarqawi killed; a permanent, elected government formed in Baghdad; hundreds of raids against terrorist cells, a treasure-trove of intelligence.
Clearly, this war is far from over, but the latest news is a reminder of how quickly the picture can change.
Democratic response
Al From isn't alone in dreaming that his party can transform itself. Jackson Diehl of The Washington Post wrote recently of a group of mostly younger foreign-affairs professionals -- former Clinton administration officials -- who are trying to offer a constructive, Democratic response to Sept. 11.
Like From, they speak of recapturing the themes of the Truman-Kennedy legacy, including the emphasis on the promotion of freedom.
Can they succeed? The early portents suggest otherwise.
UDiehl's column noted that incredibly, one poll found that half of Democrats surveyed opposed a foreign policy based on the global promotion of freedom.
UHillary Clinton was booed by liberal activists for opposing a timetable for Iraq withdrawal -- a reminder that for Democrats, the war breeds deep intra-party division.
ULast week's spectacle of Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha and other prominent Democrats demanding a rapid pullout from Iraq -- their favored euphemism is "redeployment" -- only perpetuated the image of Democrats as the party of defeatism.
True, recent polls show the Republicans' political edge on terrorism eroding. Democrats may have an opening, but it's not clear they can seize it.
X E. Thomas McClanahan is a member of the Kansas City Star editorial board. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.