Norquist: Establishment Dems Hoping for Kerry Loss
NewsMax.com | July/7/04 | Phil Brennan
John Edwards, Sen. Kerry's newly chosen running mate is no friend of America's taxpayers, says taxpayer advocate Grover Norquist.
Moreover, the choice of Edwards as Kerry's running mate carries with it a lot of negatives for Bill and Hillary Clinton - and any democrat who has his eyes on the White House.
Norquist, who heads Americans for Tax Reform in Washington, D.C., and is considered one of the shrewdest political, observers in Washington told NewsMax.com in an exclusive interview: "One week ago, the United States transferred power to a sovereign government in Iraq. By choosing John Edwards over Dick Gephardt, the Democrats today transferred power in their party from the labor unions to the trial lawyers."
"Like Kerry, Edwards has a nasty record of voting against taxpayers," Norquist explained. "In six short years he has amassed an anti-taxpayer record rivaling both Kerry and the other Massachusetts senator, Kennedy. "Edwards voted against the 2001 and 2003 tax relief plans, voted 12 times against repealing the marriage penalty, 8 times against repealing the Death Tax, against the per-child tax credit, against suspending the gasoline tax, and is an ardent protectionist. "In the last six years, if a policy was good for taxpayers, Edwards was on the wrong side every time," said Norquist.
According to Norquist, Edward's background as a trial lawyer will inject tremendous energy into both the business and medical communities. By choosing Edwards, Norquist said, Kerry declared war on on both groups. "This choice was a declaration of war on doctors, hospitals and the entire business community.
"It also has another problem. Vice President Cheney as Bush's nominee is a guy who obviously could become president because he has a serious leadership history, which Edwards doesn't."
The selection of Edwards also has great political significance, Norquist said. "Every Republican who wants to be president someday wishes Bush well. If you are a governor or senator who'd like to be president in 2008, you want Bush to win - you don't want to be running against Edwards in 2008. You want Bush to retire and give you an open shot at it.
"On the Democrat side, should Kerry win, the presidency isn't open in 2008 - it won't be open until 2012. With Edwards as vice president, if Kerry wins, it's not open until 2016." This, he said, was "bad news for Hillary Clinton. It means her career is over. She'll never be president. The whole point of being Hillary will be she's just another vote in the Senate unless everyone you talk to believes that someday you'll be president. Then you're not just another Senator from a liberal state, you're important.
"As a result, every significant Democrat who might be president knows that they would be better off if they woke up the day after the election and Kerry lost." It's not just Hillary and her fellow Democratic hopefuls who would be the big losers if Kerry won.
"The biggest loser will be Bill Clinton who, if Kerry wins, will no longer be the titular head of the Democrat party, which he is today."
Norquist continued: "Kerry will take over the Democratic National Committee and put his own people in, and Bill Clinton will just be an interesting guy who used to be president. He'd have as much clout in the party as Jimmy Carter."
The fact is that Clinton still has a lot of assets - fund raising ability and a knack for rallying the African
American vote among other things. Norquist wonders, "How hard does he work" for Kerry? After all, Norquist said, "if [Clinton] helps Kerry win the presidency he slits his own political throat. And when has Bill Clinton every done something for the greater good rather than his own personal interests?"
Summing up, Norquist said that "the incentives for the establishment are negative. The question now becomes are you with 20,000 trial lawyers or several million small businessmen?"
NewsMax.com | July/7/04 | Phil Brennan
John Edwards, Sen. Kerry's newly chosen running mate is no friend of America's taxpayers, says taxpayer advocate Grover Norquist.
Moreover, the choice of Edwards as Kerry's running mate carries with it a lot of negatives for Bill and Hillary Clinton - and any democrat who has his eyes on the White House.
Norquist, who heads Americans for Tax Reform in Washington, D.C., and is considered one of the shrewdest political, observers in Washington told NewsMax.com in an exclusive interview: "One week ago, the United States transferred power to a sovereign government in Iraq. By choosing John Edwards over Dick Gephardt, the Democrats today transferred power in their party from the labor unions to the trial lawyers."
"Like Kerry, Edwards has a nasty record of voting against taxpayers," Norquist explained. "In six short years he has amassed an anti-taxpayer record rivaling both Kerry and the other Massachusetts senator, Kennedy. "Edwards voted against the 2001 and 2003 tax relief plans, voted 12 times against repealing the marriage penalty, 8 times against repealing the Death Tax, against the per-child tax credit, against suspending the gasoline tax, and is an ardent protectionist. "In the last six years, if a policy was good for taxpayers, Edwards was on the wrong side every time," said Norquist.
According to Norquist, Edward's background as a trial lawyer will inject tremendous energy into both the business and medical communities. By choosing Edwards, Norquist said, Kerry declared war on on both groups. "This choice was a declaration of war on doctors, hospitals and the entire business community.
"It also has another problem. Vice President Cheney as Bush's nominee is a guy who obviously could become president because he has a serious leadership history, which Edwards doesn't."
The selection of Edwards also has great political significance, Norquist said. "Every Republican who wants to be president someday wishes Bush well. If you are a governor or senator who'd like to be president in 2008, you want Bush to win - you don't want to be running against Edwards in 2008. You want Bush to retire and give you an open shot at it.
"On the Democrat side, should Kerry win, the presidency isn't open in 2008 - it won't be open until 2012. With Edwards as vice president, if Kerry wins, it's not open until 2016." This, he said, was "bad news for Hillary Clinton. It means her career is over. She'll never be president. The whole point of being Hillary will be she's just another vote in the Senate unless everyone you talk to believes that someday you'll be president. Then you're not just another Senator from a liberal state, you're important.
"As a result, every significant Democrat who might be president knows that they would be better off if they woke up the day after the election and Kerry lost." It's not just Hillary and her fellow Democratic hopefuls who would be the big losers if Kerry won.
"The biggest loser will be Bill Clinton who, if Kerry wins, will no longer be the titular head of the Democrat party, which he is today."
Norquist continued: "Kerry will take over the Democratic National Committee and put his own people in, and Bill Clinton will just be an interesting guy who used to be president. He'd have as much clout in the party as Jimmy Carter."
The fact is that Clinton still has a lot of assets - fund raising ability and a knack for rallying the African
American vote among other things. Norquist wonders, "How hard does he work" for Kerry? After all, Norquist said, "if [Clinton] helps Kerry win the presidency he slits his own political throat. And when has Bill Clinton every done something for the greater good rather than his own personal interests?"
Summing up, Norquist said that "the incentives for the establishment are negative. The question now becomes are you with 20,000 trial lawyers or several million small businessmen?"
