Left field and left-of-center In

Left field and left-of-center

In today’s Washington Times, Tony Blankley writes on Nancy Pelosi. aspirant for House Minority Leader. When asked if she was a liberal,

Mrs. Pelosi’s feeble response has been, “When people describe me as a liberal I always say, ‘Well, I guess you could describe an Italian American grandmother that way.’ ” She could hardly duck the liberal appellation. She has called herself “a Democrat in the New Deal tradition.” Sixty years ago that would make her a liberal. Today it makes her a reactionary liberal. She has a 100 percent liberal voting record. On her Web site she includes amongst “Her favorite photos” pictures of her discussing U.S. policy on Tibet with Richard Gere, her in a Cesar Chavez Day Parade, and her attending the opening of the San Francisco Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center.

She opposes prayer in school, reducing the marriage penalty and repealing the death tax. She is in favor of implementing the Kyoto Protocol (it lost in a Senate vote 96-0). Not only did she vote against the Iraqi war-authorization, but a decade ago she opposed the Persian Gulf War with the following explanation: “While we are greatly concerned about the loss of life from combat in the Persian Gulf War, environmental consequences of the war are as important . . .” Not too many Americans will share her equal concern for the dislocated dirt and the dead GI at the bottom of a bomb crater.

On NRO, Stanley Kurtz writes about a a gruesome possibility:

The Democrats are in trouble. I’ll get to that in a bit. But first, consider the following scenario, wherein the Democrats take back the Senate within months. Step one is Mary Landrieu’s successful defense of her Senate seat on December 7. Step two: Lincoln Chafee and John McCain simultaneously become Democrats next January, moving the Senate back to a 51/49 Democrat majority (with Jeffords still supporting the Democrats).

Would McCain switch for any other reason than to position himself for a run for the White House in 2004? It seems not. As I said, it is a gruesome possibility.