Analysis: Democrats vow to get tough

WASHINGTON - Six weeks before elections, the Democratic strategy for the war on terror is one part attack President Bush and one part agree with him. The goal is to court voters dissatisfied with the job the administration has done, yet avoid being tagged as soft on Osama bin Laden.

"Democrats are united behind the need to work on a bipartisan basis to bring terrorists to justice, and to do it in a manner consistent with our laws, our values and our national security," Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said a few hours after Bush and rebellious Republicans ended a week-long dispute and compromised on a plan for interrogating and trying terror suspects.

He didn't quite say so, but it seems likely the deal announced Thursday — and blessed by Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) of Arizona as well as Bush — will draw significant Democratic support when it reaches the Senate floor.

Beyond the tribute to the importance of American values and Geneva Conventions protections for wartime prisoners, Democrats, particularly in the Senate, are applying painfully learned lessons of past campaigns.

"This is a Max Cleland moment," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., referring to the Georgia Democrat defeated for re-election in 2002. Republicans are "trying to produce a vote that provides a 30-second ad like the one that defeated Cleland," he added.

Cleland, a triple amputee Vietnam War veteran, lost four years ago after being attacked in a campaign commercial that included cameo appearances by bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. The ad accused the Georgian of voting against Bush's proposal for a Department of Homeland Security 11 times. In fact, he favored creation of the agency before the president did, and differed with the administration principally on issues relating to civil service rules for employees.

That was four years ago, when the country was still reeling from the attacks of 9-11, and Bush was winning strong support for the job he was doing as commander in chief in the war on terror.

Two years later, Democratic Sen. John Kerry ran for president and observed he had voted for $87 billion to pay for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan before voting against it. It turned out the electorate was less conflicted than that. Bush and the Republicans won again.

Now, the national mood has shifted. Much of the advantage Bush and the Republicans enjoyed on the issue of combatting terror has eroded, although the president has labored strenuously in recent weeks, with some success, to restore it.

The polls show deep public dissatisfaction with the war in Iraq, even if voters are split down the middle on what the next step should be.

Democrats, primed by poll-tested advice, are projecting strength this time, determined not to let Bush and the Republicans outflank them once again.

"Welcome the national security debate and engage in it," several top strategists advised in a recent memo. Another recommendation: "stress the seriousness of the threat and Democrats' determination to address it using statements such as: "We need stronger tools to monitor, hunt down and kill terrorists."

Third, Democrats were advised to accuse Bush of mismanaging the war in Iraq. Not coincidentally, they intend to hold a public forum on Monday and say former top-ranking military officers who served in Iraq will testify about mismanagement in the conflict.

Finally, the memo from Democracy Corps says "stress that Democrats offer a 'better way to fight terrorism.'" Example: call for the inspection of all cargo containers entering the country.

Given the central role of the war on terror in the campaign, the same clash is unfolding across the Capitol.

There, as in the Senate, Republicans hope for an opening to outmaneuver House Democrats on an issue the GOP has long called its own.

They thought they had an opening recently when Rep. Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record), the Democratic leader, said of bin Laden: "He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But, in fact, the damage that he has done is done. And even to capture him now I don't think makes us any safer."

Rep. John Boehner (news, bio, voting record), R-Ohio, the House majority leader, bluntly questioned whether Democrats are "are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people."

EDITOR'S NOTE: David Espo is The Associated Press' chief congressional correspondent

Pelosi: 'Democrats Will Restore the Economic Security of America's Working Families'

Fri Sep 22, 12:57 PM ET

To: National Desk

Contact: Brendan Daly or Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616, both of the Office of House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi

WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi joined Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Congressman George Miller (D-Calif.) and Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) at an economic forum at the Capitol this morning to discuss the problems Americans face with obtaining a secure economic future.
Below are Pelosi's remarks:

"Last week, President Bush said that he hopes the upcoming elections 'are based on economic performance.' In that case, voters will have a clear choice and we welcome the challenge. I know that with the distinguished panel that we have today we will have even more substantive proposals to make the case to the American people. The case is clear - real incomes for middle- class families have declined since the president took office; annual costs have risen rapidly: health insurance has increased by almost $1,000, energy costs have increased by more than $2,000, and college costs have increased by more than $1,500.

"The middle class is being squeezed by lower incomes and increasing costs and being forced to live paycheck to paycheck. It is a reality in our country, one that the president doesn't seem to be aware of. For the working poor, the crunch is even worse.

"This has been recently documented in a report by my colleague, Henry Waxman of California, the senior Democrat on the Committee on Government Reform. Other studies support it: never before in our nation's history have we had four years of economic growth and declining median income of working families.

"Corporate profits are the highest they have ever been since 1950 as a share of GDP, yet compensation for employees is the lowest, except for one year, since 1968 as a share of GDP. Further, this administration has the worst record of job creation since Herbert Hoover. We have had the largest fiscal turnaround in our nation's history.

The Bush administration already has accrued more foreign debt than the previous 42 presidents combined. The policies of this administration have favored the privileged few at the expense of America's working families.

"We must move in a new direction for everyone - not just the privileged few. Just as we did under President Clinton, we can ensure economic growth that benefits every segment of our society, create enough jobs to meet the growing labor force, drive the unemployment rate to record lows, turn federal budget deficits into budget surpluses, and at the same time strengthen Social Security.

"Some of our proposals are in our New Direction for America that we put forth. Among the suggestions were to make the economy fairer by raising the minimum wage and repealing the subsidies for companies that send our jobs overseas. It's quite a remarkable phenomenon: you're a worker, you pay taxes, and your taxes are used to give an incentive to a company to send your job overseas, and then you are asked to train your replacement or else you won't get any severance.

"Essential to economic security for American families is access to health care, and we will make health care more affordable by giving the federal government the opportunity to negotiate for the lower the cost of prescription drugs. We will make college more accessible by cutting interest rates for student loans in half, and making tuition tax deductible. And we will do this with fiscal discipline.

"In addition to some of those things that we can do within the first 100 hours of a new Congress, a longer-term goal would be to ensure economic justice and opportunity by supporting our Innovation Agenda. It says that the future prosperity and competitiveness of America demands that we initiate a sustained financial investment in innovation. In doing this, we must also ensure that our children and grandchildren are not burdened by failed policies that have exploded the national debt. That is why House Democrats put these priorities under the rigors of pay- as-you-go budgeting to ensure that new spending or tax cuts do not add to the deficit.

"Also essential to our economic success is to advance energy independence with solutions that are homegrown. Our energy independence plan commits America to a comprehensive plan that provides tax incentives to encourage increased biofuel production, increase the number of flex fuel cars, expand ethanol use, and it also goes to other alternative energy resources as well.

"Democrats believe that none of this matters unless we have strong national security to protect the American people. But the strength of our country must also be measured by the economic wellbeing of America's families. Today, we will hear some positive initiatives on how to take us to that place, but we have a challenge because the priorities of this administration have been for the privileged few and not for all Americans." http://www.usnewswire.com/

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.