Gary Hart again defends his "anti-dual loyalty" comment" against critics.

Former Colorado senator Gary Hart insists he never meant to impugn the patriotism of any particular ethnic group of Americans --especially Jews --when he said in a speech last week that certain Americans can't separate their "loyalties to their original homelands" from their loyalty to America.

Insisting that his overall thesis was sound, Hart added, "Would anyone want to defend the negative?"

Hart said he "threw out a handfulof names" — he cited Irish Americans and Cuban Americans — in response to a question by ABC News at his Stanford speech, but he characterized that response as a "throwaway." He declined to elaborate on those examples, saying his foreign policy speech was not meant to be prescriptive, but only a "framework," a "statement of principles."

Asked whether he had any policy prescriptions regarding Israel, Hart said no. "Anyone who is familiar with my senatorial record," he added, "knows I took an active role in the Middle East and was a strong advocate for a free, strong, independent Israel across the board."

In our opinion, it's time to put this one to rest. The critics' concerns are groundless. Hart provided some more criticism of Bush's war plans in the Forward interview:

Hart had harsh words for current American policy toward Iraq, telling the Forward that "some senior American officials are on record as advocating" a plan for a long-term military presence in the nation that amounts to "an imperial design." "The president should account to the American people more clearly who will go with us, what military force we will use, how much it will cost... and how many American and Iraqi casualties there will be," Hart said. "On a desk in the Pentagon there are casualty estimates. The president is obligated to share those. The worst thing that could happen is that public support will erode, which is what happened in Vietnam."