NewsMax.com Wires
Sunday, Aug. 14, 2005

Story Continues Below

  Both are forceful, powerful, ambitious women in their mid-50s who live in Westchester County with husbands who have publicly caused them pain.

Of course, Clinton attracts attention wherever she goes, and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, is enormously popular around the globe. Pirro is not yet well known even around the state and her husband, Albert Pirro, is a convicted tax evader she is not likely to show off much.

But as Pirro, the Republican district attorney, traveled the state this week to stake her claim to Clinton's seat, it became clear that on many issues the Republican district attorney and the Democratic incumbent hold identical or similar positions.

"If there are big issues differentiating them, I'll be darned if I can see what they are," said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Clinton and Pirro both support civil unions but oppose gay marriage; both support the death penalty in some cases; both say it was wrong to let the ban on assault weapons expire; both oppose the procedure known as partial-birth abortion except when the mother's health (Clinton) or life (Pirro) is endangered.

Pirro says she supports the war on terror; Clinton voted in favor of going to war in Iraq.

The similarities prompted one of Pirro's challengers for the Republican nomination, former Yonkers Mayor John Spencer, to mock up a chart of the issues titled "Liberal Pirro Equals Liberal Hillary." And Nelson Warfield, a top aide on Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign, said, "If by some chance she makes it to the U.S. Senate, Pirro would join that group of liberal Republicans who so vex this party."

Carroll said the Clinton-Pirro alignment is not surprising because "one's a fairly moderate Democrat and one's a fairly standard Northeast Republican."

"Hillary Clinton owns the loony left but she's not a loony lefty," he said, "and Jeanine Pirro, I doubt that she'd be nominated as a Republican in Mississippi or Alabama."

When Pirro was asked where she differs from Clinton on policy, she said President Bush's tax cuts "need to be made permanent," which Clinton opposes. But the main reason she gave for running is the assertion that Clinton will run for president in 2008.

"That's not going to be enough," said John Marino, a former state Democratic chairman and a Westchester resident. "That's weaker than what they tried in 2000, calling Hillary a carpetbagger."

"Jeanine Pirro is a district attorney and a lawyer and I'm sure she knows how to make a case," Marino said. "She has to make a case for herself, differentiate herself, try to show the people what would make her a better senator than Hillary Clinton. I don't know how she does that, certainly not on the issues."

Michael Edelman, a Republican commentator in Westchester, said voters will see differences in style.

"Jeanine is a lot more sparky, more upbeat," he said. "She comes across as someone who is compassionate, somebody who is on a mission. Hillary is more of a policy wonk, having lived in the White House with her husband."

Carroll warned against assuming that Pirro, once on of People magazine's "most beautiful people," would have an advantage on the trail.

"Both are exceptionally good at campaigning," he said.

Although there were awkward moments because of a missing page during her Wednesday speech, at news conferences Pirro usually seems a bit more relaxed, and less guarded with her words, than Clinton. Whether that will persist under the scrutiny of a Senate race is unknown.

Also yet to be seen is what part the candidates' husbands play.

The homes in Chappaqua and Harrison both have security gates, and in a way the gates are emblematic of the man of the house. The Clintons' were put up by the Secret Service to protect the former president, who despite his fling with Monica Lewinsky is generally considered an asset to his wife's campaign.

He went to bat for her Thursday on CNN, praising her work on New York's economy and health care and her visits to combat zones and criticizing Pirro for saying the former first lady was using New York as a "doormat" to get back to the White House.

The Pirro gates became newsworthy during Albert Pirro's federal tax evasion trial in 2000, when prosecutors said he had deducted the $45,000 cost as a business expense. His lawyers claimed the gates were needed because of threats against his wife and their two children; she walked out of the courtroom when prosecutors criticized the deduction.

She also skipped most of the testimony about the deduction her husband claimed for his unsuccessful battle against a paternity suit.

He was convicted and served 11 months in prison; while he was away, his wife won her third term as DA.

"If it's the kind of campaign that New York deserves, it won't be about who cheated on her fifth grade social studies test," Carroll said, "and it certainly won't be about the husbands."

© 2005 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Editor's note:
Breaking: Dick Morris Says It's Condi vs. Hillary in 2008 – Click Here Now

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
2006 Elections