-Caveat Lector-
Between the Lines Online: Back to the Battlefield
May 24, 2001
Newsweek Web Exclusive
By Jonathan Alter
One day last month in the lobby of New York's Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, I was
approached by Chris Ruddy, the "journalist" who gave the world the "Vince
Foster Was Murdered!" story. Ruddy introduced the smiling gentleman with
him
as "Dick Scaife": yes, Richard Mellon Scaife. After a cheerful hello, the
reclusive right-wing billionaire, now nearly deaf, said that he couldn't
think of any reason to criticize President Bush so far. This was
extraordinary-the symbol of the far right in total agreement with the
president. Then I asked him what he was going to do now that he didn't have
Bill Clinton to kick around any more. Scaife, who spent several million
dollars over eight years on the "Arkansas Project" and other efforts to
destroy Clinton over Paula Jones, Whitewater and the rest, shouted with a
grin: "There's always Hillary!"
With the Democrats soon to be in charge of the Senate and with today's
confirmation of Scaife's pal Theodore Olson to be solicitor general, is it
possible we may be headed back to the partisan wars of the Clinton era?
Both
sides are trying to figure out how the new Senate power arrangements will
affect partisan retribution and tit-for-tat politics. When will shooting
back at the other team be appropriate-and when just payback?
The first big test was the Olson nomination, which deadlocked 9-9 in the
Judiciary Committee last week before being approved 51-47 this afternoon on
the floor of the Senate. The Democrats didn't have enough votes to stop it,
despite big doubts about Olson. But the only way the Republicans got the
nomination to the floor was under the power-sharing arrangement that was
worked out after the Senate split 50-50 in November. With the Democrats
soon
to hold a 51-49 advantage, that arrangement is doomed. Olson snuck in just
under the wire.
He and Attorney General John Ashcroft had better keep each other company,
because they are the last very conservative nominees who can expect to be
approved before the next election. Sen. Pat Leahy will replace Sen. Orrin
Hatch as the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which reviews such
nominations. And soon-to-be Majority Leader Tom Daschle will be able to
scuttle most controversial nominees that do clear the committee on the
floor.
You can expect that the Republicans, especially in the Senate, will quickly
accuse the newly emboldened Democrats of returning to the highly partisan
ways of the past. (New York Times columnist William Safire has already
begun
the drumbeat). Without the responsibility of controlling the chamber, GOP
firebrands can go into hard-edged opposition, where they feel more
comfortable, anyway.
So much for "changing the tone in Washington." That, you may recall, was
Gov. Bush's main argument for electing him last year. Now we are told that
to stop the "politics of personal destruction" and end the "cycle of
recriminations" Olson had to be confirmed. "If there's ever going to be a
de-escalation, someone will have to go first, no matter how painful that
is," The Washington Post editorialized last week in support of the
nomination.
It's a nice sentiment, but probably wishful thinking. The problem with the
"de-escalation" theory is that it assumes that politicians actually want to
put all of that unpleasantness behind us. But do they? If the president
truly wanted to "change the tone," he never would have nominated for an
important post like solicitor general someone like Olson, who played such a
central part in poisoning the political culture in the first place. It was
a
stick in the eye, a way of saying to the Democrats: "We're going to make
you
swallow this Clinton hater whether you want to or not."
Olson is understandably sensitive about his role in trashing Clinton, the
first time ever that a sitting president's actions before coming to office
were subjected to such partisan venom from Washington. The man who will
soon
be the representative of the people in the Supreme Court (the role of the
solicitor general ) would rather we forget his anonymous articles in "The
American Spectator" accusing many Clinton administration officials,
pre-Monica Lewinsky, of committing serious "crimes" for which there was
never any sustainable evidence. He has not apologized to any of those
officials for smearing their reputations or admitted that Whitewater and
the
rest of the pre-Monica "scandals" never panned out in the way he claimed
they would. He has not renounced his membership on the boards of
Scaife-funded organizations determined to destroy Clinton.
By testifying that he was "not involved" in the "origin or management" of
the Arkansas Project, Olson is probably smart enough to be telling the
literal truth. But can anyone doubt what would have happened if , say, a
President Gore had offered an ambassadorship to one of the Maine lawyers
who
peddled the DUI charges against Bush during the campaign and then testified
evasively about it? Olson (who repeatedly called Clinton a "liar" on TV)
and
his relentless wife Barbara (the author of a hatchet book on Hillary
Clinton) would have been the first to cry foul.
The details of who did what to whom in the Clinton era are irritating now,
the residue of a time we'd rather forget. Almost everyone says he wants to
"move on" to whatever comes next. But there are plenty of folks who don't
really mean it, from Democrats who will find vengeance easier on the next
controversial Bush nominee, to Republicans like Richard Mellon Scaife,
willing to do what it takes to crush the opposition.
=======================================================
Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh, YHVH, TZEVAOT
FROM THE DESK OF:
*Michael Spitzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Best Way To Destroy Enemies Is To Change Them To Friends
=======================================================
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
