Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.
Editorials
Friday, August 18, 2000Gore shows he can
get his message acrossThe issue: Vice President Al Gore needed to do well in his speech accepting the Democratic presidential nomination.
AL Gore gave a rousing speech in accepting the Democratic presidential nomination last night, putting George W. Bush on notice that he faces a formidable opponent in the general election. Gore acknowledged that he is sometimes criticized as too serious -- make that stiff and boring -- but he showed he could deliver a speech that had his admittedly partisan audience cheering enthusiastically. The performance probably equaled or surpassed Bush's speech at the Republican convention and satisfied most of the doubters.
Gore's script was fashioned along the lines of countless populist addresses, slamming the special interests and pledging to stand up for the little guy. Not surprisingly, there was little or nothing in it that departed from the policies of the Clinton-Gore administration. But he vowed to carry the fight forward in such areas as health care, education, the environment and campaign reform -- while protecting Social Security and Medicare.
Indeed, there were so many sweeping promises that even the huge budget surpluses that have been projected for the next decade may not suffice to pay for all of them -- particularly in conjunction with the tax cuts Gore proposes.
It was on the subject of taxes that Gore took his most effective digs at his Republican opponent, assailing Bush for proposing massive cuts for the rich and peanuts for the middle class and the poor. It was old-fashioned populist rhetoric, and the convention delegates ate it up.
But even this outstanding performance probably suffered by comparison with the valedictory address delivered Monday night by President Clinton, whose oratorical skills are unmatched by any other contemporary politician. Gore is struggling to get out of Clinton's shadow and establish himself as his own man, but it isn't easy.
Nor was the path to victory made any easier by the disclosure that a new grand jury has been empaneled to hear evidence against Clinton in the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Having to compete for attention with that issue -- which seemed to have been settled with the impeachment struggle in Congress -- is bound to pose a problem for the candidate.
The vice president's choice of Sen. Joseph Lieberman as his running mate appeared intended to distance himself from the Clinton scandals -- Lieberman was the first Democrat to denounce Clinton for the Lewinsky affair, while Gore was conspicuous in Clinton's defense. The Gore campaign also took pains to emphasize his strong family ties and high moral standards -- in implicit contrast to the president.
Gore may have opened another can of worms by vowing to fight for campaign reform. His own involvement in the campaign contribution violations of the 1996 election has been a continuing embarrassment and the Republicans can be expected to remind the voters of it in questioning his qualifications as a reformer.
Gore of course showed no reluctance to boast about the achievements of the Clinton administration, particularly the remarkably strong economy -- while ignoring its scandals. Running on the Clinton-Gore record while vowing a fresh approach will be a difficult balancing act, but Gore must succeed if he is to win this election.
Russian pride
RUSSIANS have been clinging to their tarnished national pride since the collapse of the Soviet Union, but the consequences of false pride can be grave. Pride seems to have kept Russian leaders from asking for help from other countries in trying to rescue 118 crewmen of a nuclear submarine trapped on the floor of the Barents Sea. A last-minute decision to accept aid may have come too late.
Foreign assistance was offered as early as Monday, the day the Russian government announced the submarine Kursk had became disabled 350 feet beneath the surface of the sea between Norway and Russia. The Russians turned down the offers.
Finally, on Wednesday, Vladislav Ilyin, the Russian navy's deputy chief of staff, said on Russian television that President Vladimir Putin gave the order "to accept help wherever it comes from" after a 30-minute telephone conversation with President Clinton. British and Norwegian rescue teams immediately joined the effort.
Norwegian Defense Minister Bjoern Tore Godal was unequivocal in his criticism of the late request. "A telephone call would have been appropriate at an earlier point in time," Godal said. However, Godal conceded that alerting other countries "is not the first thing you think about when faced with an accident of this nature."
A British rescue team had been preparing for the call for days. When it finally came, the British team responded with hope that it was not too late. "We would not be going unless we thought there was something positive we could do," said Commodore Tim Chittenden. The question is how positive the team's efforts could have been if it has been asked to help two days earlier.
British and Norwegian rescue submarines may turn out to be incompatible with the crippled Russian submarine and may have been unable to be effective in rescuing crewmen even at the earliest stage of the catastrophe.
However, the mere chance that they could have helped should have prompted an international S.O.S. from the Russians. Moscow should not allow its citizens to be sacrificed on the altar of national pride.
Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited PartnershipRupert E. Phillips, CEO
John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher
David Shapiro, Managing Editor
Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor
Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors
A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor
