WALL STREET WOBBLES
We thought about making fun of the New York Times editorial page earlier this week. Mr. Starr, its editorialist had written, was not just "an obsessive personality" but "seems determined to write himself into the history books as a narcissistic legal crank." He should "shut up" but he "keeps flapping around," so the Senate "needs to find a way to slap Mr. Starr back into line." This, from a paper that was calling Tom DeLay "thuggish" a few weeks back. The explanation for this temper tantrum can be gleaned from a sentence in the penultimate paragraph: "Indeed, virtually everyone in the capital except Mr. Starr seems to know that censure-plus-admission, speedily arrived at, would be a far better outcome for the country than a trial for either a sitting or former President." Of course, "virtually everyone in the capital" believes no such thing, unless two-thirds of the city's Republicans have evacuated while we weren't looking, and the Times editorialist's rage stems from the world's refusal to conform to his wishes, no matter how often reiterated.

Only at the Times, we thought. But no. It is our sad duty to report that the editors of the Wall Street Journal -- who earlier this week had the very good sense to quote the Washington Bulletin -- have descended to the level of playground taunts in their defense of the "finding of fact" resolution. Sarcasm is their weapon of choice, as when they describe critics of the resolution as an "amazing legion of sages" and "our Constitutional priests." David Tell's brilliant and sometimes eloquent exposition of the case against the resolution can be dismissed because he is, after all, one of "the Beltway conservatives gathered at the Weekly Standard" (as if the finding-of-fact idea wasn't precisely a Beltway strategem!). All of us have a "death wish" and "should face reality."

The motive for all this table-pounding is the usual one: the Journal's case is weak. The editorial gives that away with its first words, a much-misused quotation from Justice Robert Jackson: "There is danger that, if the Court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact." The dictum that the Constitution is not a suicide pact is meant to avert grave danger to the country. The Journal is concerned to prevent Republicans from committing political "suicide." We can understand why the good people over at the RNC might think that the two scenarios are equivalent, but the Journal?

The fact-finders have unearthed one precedent, from 1804, and the Journal triumphantly declares that the surviving Founders "were still alive and able to object had they cared to." Will the Journal next editorialize in favor of bringing back the Alien and Sedition Act? And then there's the Journal's dumbest argument: that the "finding of fact" resolution is permissible because the Senate is "entitled" to the "clear Constitutional guarantee of free speech." Would that the Journal returns to the sensible recommendations and thoughtful tone that usually distinguish it in future exercises of its free speech rights.

GOP PICK-ME-UP
Rep. Tom Davis, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said that he plans to share plenty of bad news with House colleagues at their three-day retreat. "I am a realist and I am going to give a sobering assessment of where we are and what we need to do to get where we need to be," he told Roll Call. The NRCC is $4 million in debt and GOP poll numbers look bleak.

With that in mind, the Republican National Committee collected several of the most GOP-friendly polls issued recently. Zogby finds that 40 percent of likely voters would vote Republican in Congressional elections held today, versus 39 percent for Democrats. Fox News says that 70 percent of registered voters believe President Clinton perjured himself before a grand jury, and Zogby claims 55 percent of likely voters think that's impeachable. The Los Angeles Times shows Texas Gov. George W. Bush leading Vice President Al Gore 57 percent to 39 percent among adults, and Elizabeth Dole beating Gore 50 percent to 42 percent. Finally, Rasmussen Research reports that 68 percent of adults favor a 10 percent across-the-board tax cut.

UN MOMENTO, POR FAVOR
Texas Gov. George W. Bush likes to brag about his strong support among Hispanic voters. Exit polls last November showed 49 percent of Hispanics supporting his re-election. Bush's official web page touts this number, and it is a key component of the argument for the Republicans' nominating Bush for President. But now it turns out that this figure may be inflated. The Voter News Service exit poll used by television networks and the Associated Press to call races on election night isn't designed primarily to analyze voter demographics. It makes an attempt--that's where Bush's number come from--but it is an imprecise tool. Rice University political scientist Bob Stein, who helped VNS design its Texas questionnaire last year, recently told the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram that a closer examination of individual precinct results and subsequent weighting suggests that Bush's Hispanic support was actually in the high 30s or low 40s. An exit poll by the San Antonio-based William Velasquez Institute pegged it at 39 percent. That's still outstanding for a Republican, and close to President Reagan's 1984 performance.