"OK people! When the phone rings, just say what's on the cue card: 'Thank you for calling the John McCain Presidential Campaign Charity Telethon. How much is your pledge?' Stay positive, everyone!"
Posted on 07/28/2007 3:47:43 AM PDT by Kaslin
WASHINGTON -- Karl Rove, President Bush's political lieutenant, told a closed-door meeting of 2008 Republican House candidates and their aides Tuesday that it was less the war in Iraq than corruption in Congress that caused their party's defeat in the 2006 elections.
Rove's clear advice to the candidates is to distance themselves from the culture of Washington. Specifically, Republican candidates are urged to make clear they have no connection with disgraced congressmen such as Duke Cunningham and Mark Foley.
In effect, Rove was rebutting the complaint inside the party that George W. Bush is responsible for Republican miseries by invading Iraq.
MCCAIN VS. THOMPSON
Sen. John McCain, trying to keep his sinking Republican presidential campaign afloat, scheduled a fund-raiser for the same day -- Monday -- that Fred Thompson is holding his first Washington money event. McCain's reception is in the same suburban Virginia neighborhood where Thompson lives.
McCain's $1,000-to-$2,300 per person "intimate lunch" is being held at the McLean, Va., home of Wes Foster. He is chairman and CEO of Long & Foster, a major Washington area real estate firm. Thompson is holding a reception that night at the J.W. Marriott hotel in downtown Washington.
A footnote: Alabama Atty. Gen. Troy King, McCain's state chairman, attended a private fund-raiser for Thompson in Mountain Brook, Ala., last Monday night. However, as an invited guest, King did not pay the $1,000 price of admission and said he was still committed to McCain.
PENTAGON EARMARKS
Sen. Tom Coburn, frustrated with the Pentagon winking at earmarks, wrote Defense Secretary Robert Gates July 19 requesting a critique of all Defense spending items asked by members of Congress to determine whether they "are for necessary national security purposes or to satisfy the parochial self-interests of politicians and defense industry lobbyists."
Coburn has experienced difficulty in getting information from the Pentagon on more than 300 earmarks contained in the Defense Department authorization bill. Over the past five years, such earmarks have cost taxpayers $55 billion. Coburn has not received a response from Gates at this writing. He has failed to mandate such critiques by legislative action.
Earmarks cited in Coburn's letter to Gates include more than $40 million for 21st Century Systems Inc. (21 CSI), sponsored by Sen. Ben Nelson. In defending the earmark for a company that employs his son, Nelson claims support from the Pentagon.
Solicitations for a Sept. 12 fund-raising reception in Washington on behalf of ailing Sen. Tim Johnson give the impression he will be present at the event, but in fact there are no such plans.
Sources close to Johnson say he will not decide his schedule until he is back in the Senate, and there is no firm schedule yet for that. Johnson has not been seen publicly since suffering a brain hemorrhage last Dec. 13, but his staff has been raising funds for his re-election campaign in South Dakota. His campaign has $1.75 million cash on hand.
The $1,000-to-$2,300-a-ticket reception will be held at the home of Johnson's fellow South Dakotan, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, and his wife, transportation industry lobbyist Linda Daschle, on Foxhall Road millionaire's row in Washington. It has been speculated that if Johnson cannot run, Daschle could attempt a political comeback.
GROUCHY GINGRICH
Contrary to reports that Newt Gingrich lost control in one of his temper tantrums at a breakfast last Monday sponsored by The American Spectator magazine, the former House speaker was variously described as "grouchy," "cool" and "arrogant" in assailing his critics.
Gingrich made clear he would not be seen anytime soon engaging in multi-candidate debates with opponents for the presidency, disdaining them, as he said Charles DeGaulle once labeled his competitors, as "pygmies." But he did not rule out an eventual candidacy.
A footnote: Republican leaders report that the most enthusiasm among grassroots activists is for Gingrich and libertarian Rep. Ron Paul.
If I posted what I really thought about Rove my post would be deleted by the moderator.
Let me just say this, instead:
Rove’s a Genius, this I know, because the RNC tells me so.
We’re off to see the Wizard, the wonderful Wizard of Oz...
But he and the President need to take responsibility for not forcefully defending the war--over and over and over again.
They didn't need to be zealot crazies like Cindy Sheehah, but getting out the GOOD NEWS from Iraq and showing the progress there (instead of relying on the LAMESTREAM MEDIA to do it!) would have been wise.
And, to Rove's point, if the "dissatisfaction in Congress" was a determining factor, well that just shows ME how inept the Republicans were at pointing out the corruption in the Democrat party.
Let's face it: both parties have their whackos. The fact is, the Democrats did not have any of their corruption exposed or trumpted.
Harry Reid's shady land deals? silence. Nancy Pelosi's vineyards and her wages? silence. That crook (Jefferson, was it?) down in Louisiana? barely a mention.
Even when the Foley story broke, Republicans should have been all over the Democrats for supporting that Congressman in Massachusetts who had an affair with his intern then got a chairmanship....sorry, I forget his name.
They needn't have defended Foley, just attack the damn 'rats.
This "new tone" stuff doesn't have to be implemented when you're being targeted for destruction. The "new tone" works only when you're clearly in charge--and when it comes to the press, the Republicans are NOT in charge.
ROTFLMAO!
“A footnote: Republican leaders report that the most enthusiasm among grassroots activists is for Gingrich and libertarian Rep. Ron Paul.”
That statement destroyed any credibility (in my mind) that this article may have held. Sorry, but something this crass and bogus calls ALL facts into question.
LLS
This is news?
They just figured this out?
Heck, Rush has been saying this about the election SINCE the election.
So since the prove Liars in the Junk Media tell you it all about Iraq, of course the Know Nothings mindlessly accept that as dogma.
Curious. The Democrats did NOT even run on Iraq. They ran AWAY from it. Not one Democrat campaign ad was run here in Dark Blue MN about Iraq. Thousands were run on “the culture of corruption”, not one on Iraq.
One needs to carefully distinguish between"enthusiasm" and "manic psychosis".
President Bush went out and gave several forceful speeches on Iraq the last couple of weeks.
How much media coverage did you see? That right NONE.
In fact, AP, the primary source of wire reports for all broadcast and published “news”, simply ignored 3 hours of the President on Iraq to spend ALL its coverage on a Reporter;s stupid question about Libby.
So instead of mindlessly repeating the same whine at the President on EVERY thread, how about the Perpetually Pouting Posse on the fringe Right finally grow a spine and try attacking the Left on something ONE time?
‘Rove’s an expert...”
LOL
Yea, he sure was spot on when he kissed LaRaza’s ass.
MH you’ve missed your calling on the comedy channel.
Why? Is there some sort of protection program for Rove? If so, who else?
Here in OH, it's hard to figure it out. Dickie Morris says that 16% of indies, who voted Republican in 2000 and 2004, voted Dem last election.
While it's true, as Rush says, that if you don't have a person in the military or know someone closely who is over there, the war really doesn't affect your daily life, the constant drumbeat of casualties and bad news CONVINCES people that it does.
On the other hand, other than the war, the single biggest thing that changed from 2000 to 2006 among Republicans was their willingness to spend money and get caught in scandals. That hurt, a lot. Look at Vitter: the dual standard is ridiculous, but it's a fact of life. CLEAN UP YOUR ACT, REPUBLICANS! You can't take dirty money; you can't cheat on your wives; and you can't straddle the fence on spending.
Limbaugh echo syndrome.....
Hmm. And the color of their sky, is that in the report?
They all miss Katrina - the most clever move was the rats spinning that one as “all Bush’s fault.”
Rove refuses to admit the hatred free people have for globalism and open borders.
I was talking to my mom after the election, and she said how it was amazing how little she and my dad knew about politics before the internet. Bascially, they were absorbed with work and home life, and their entire view of the world was shaped in 30 minutes of a national news broadcast, and reading the NY Times.
The interesting thing was she said they didn’t pay much attention to Republican vs Democrat, thinking all polititians were equally corrupted, and many elections were decided simply on how the news felt, ie if there was good news, vote for the incubent, if there was bad news, just vote everybody out.
We analyze everything here, and develop a level of political understanding which I think blinds us to how the majority of voters vote. Most people aren’t freeping compulsively. Most people devote their free time to other things - motorcyles, fishing, boating, model planes. I think most votes are a reflection of how positive the news coverage is.
I think the last election was probably lost for two reasons. The media was able to make Iraq sound dreary, and emphasize the casualties, and Bush, as well as the party in general, demoralized conservatives with an absence of fiscal restraint, and failure to fix immigration in a conservative fashion, issues you could have seen here plainly. I mean look at how many people were banned. Even Travis McGee, one of the more interesting posters got axed, IIRC. People were saying here, left and right they weren’t going to vote. When we are that fractured here, the base is not going to show up the way they need to in such a closely divided nation.
I haven’t seen the data, but I find it hard to believe Duke Cunningham, or Jack Abrahmoff for that matter, are names even .05% of the population would recognize.
The Dems didn’t mention Iraq because the media was doing it for them.
I think travis is still here.
The next Presidential candidate had better address sovereignty....if we still have any.
His one good idea, which was getting more evangelical SoCons to come out and vote, did not account for what would happen next.
He allowed SoCons to believe that the administration which was elected with their votes would care about them and their issues, which was essentially a lie. He failed to understand, or didn't care, that the SoCons with the image of power almost within their grasp would terrify or repel millions of OTHER voters who hitherto were within the big tent, or were persuadable.
And his "genius" has been contagious, so that Democrat political operatives who want to copy him are busy building up the nutroots culture.
Polarization, in a country which has already demonstrated itself capable of Civil War over political questions, is very bad.
If we ever fight another one, Karl Rove will rightly go down in history as one of its architects.
And his OTHER big idea, the "Hispanics are key" one - that's so stupid, it doesn't even require comment.
In So Fl they ran Iraq commercials against Shaw and was a big reason why he lost(foley hurt too)
IMO, Bush can be blamed, but only for trying to nation build in Iraq. If we had installed a Kurdish dictator like Saddam, given him and his militias helicopter gunships and armor like Saddam used to put down the shite uprising after the first Gulf War, and let him do what Saddam would have done, we’d have probably been out in a year.
Instead, it’s now perceived we expended brave American lives on an ungrateful and honorless people, too cowardly to stand up and take what we offered them at such great cost to our servicemen. And indeed, the population often turns on our people and trys to kill them, simply because they feel the wind may be blowing in the insurgent’s direction.
I think Iraq definitely cost us in the election, but not because “Bush Lied”, or “we’re losing the war”, or any other liberal lie.
It’s because deep down, people are saying, “Why are we wasting our boys to give freedom to those assholes, who don’t deserve it in the first place?”
It’s now a bad situation. We stay, and we are wasting American lives on an ungrateful and cowardly people. But if we pull out, we give Al Qaida the exact propaganda victory they have been looking for. I think people feel Bush put us in a corner because he didn’t have the stones to ruthlessly screw foreigners to save Americans. Same problem with immigration.
He’s overall a good leader, but like his dad, he never seemed to learn that loyalty occaisionally means screwing outsiders to honor commitments to those to whom you owe loyalty. He always wants to be the good guy to everybody.
Hopefully, the surge will cause the fickle Iraqi populace to begin to support us now, due to a perception of strength and maybe we can salvage the next election, but make no mistake, Iraq was an issue in the last election.
What is sad is before Iraq, we were so dominant. Between Clinton’s sleaze and the WOT, I thought the Dems would have to wait decades to get even one side of congress.
Scorecard - Republicans - 3 (more or less, now that James Trafficant is in prison) - Democrats - I don't have the number, but it's ALL of them.
What do you have against Gingrich and Paul, from a conservative standpoint?
Gingrich is the penultimate conservative when it comes to govt. Although, I will admit, that lately he's signing on to some things that I have to scratch my head over.
Paul's message has been so twisted by people that even I am not sure where he stands. But. When I listen to him talk about conservatism vis-a-vis government, I have to agree with him.
No argument here. It would still put his conservative mind in the Oval Office.
“Karl Rove, President Bush’s political lieutenant, told a closed-door meeting of 2008 Republican House candidates and their aides Tuesday that it was less the war in Iraq than corruption in Congress that caused their party’s defeat in the 2006 elections.”
Nice try Karl LaRaza Rove. Bush holding hands with Ted Kennedy, shoving CIR and amnesty down our throats in a critical election year is what divided the party. Bush risked it and Bush lost it. Take some responsibility.
Check out my new tagline as of today...
By the way, "compassionate conservatism", I now feel, is just renaming Clinton's "triangulation" policy.
He was banned for quite some time, then un-banned.
Turkey would not tolerate independent Kurdish control of Iraq.
Tagline fix.
Pro-life and the WOT trump everything else for me. Immigration is a hot button but social conservatives in general are mixed on it depending on which Church you attend and the numbers of illegals in their state.
The Republican party needs Gingrich - just NOT as its candidate.
paul may have some great Conservative beliefs... but ISOLATIONISM and SURRENDER, as well as blaming America for 9/11 is a MAJOR flaw that I cannot accept... no more than I would buchanan.
One thing I will NOT do, is to stop fighting liberals and dims and surrender the Whitehouse and any chance of regaining the House or Senate in 2008... all because I’m pi$$ed at Bush and the RNC... which I most certainly am. Dat is how I sees things.
LLS
The writer is on crack!
Really and who signed off on all the earmarks?
I would probably modify his statement.."Republican candidates are urged to make clear they have no connection with Bush"
I guess that's why Rove and Bush supported the career RINO Republicans in 2006.
Rove is in legacy building mode.
Harry Reid's shady land deals? silence. Nancy Pelosi's vineyards and her wages? silence. That crook (Jefferson, was it?) down in Louisiana? barely a mention.
Pelosi was investigated locally
Marc Grossman, United Farm Workers Union: "It is patently illegal for any grower to even discuss a union contract, which is the only way you can supply union workers, without the workers first having voted in a state conducted secret ballot election."
I asked Peter Schweizer, the Hoover Research fellow, if he had researched those facts before he called Pelosi a hypocrite.
Peter Schweizer: "It's really for her to explain why there is this inconsistency. It's not my responsibility to go and find out how every single particular circumstance is handled on the Pelosi vineyard."
The 1975 Agricultural Labor Relations Act is pretty clear, what Peter Schweizer suggests would be illegal. Growers like Pelosi can't just hire workers from a union, but workers can unionize on their own and then negotiate with growers after they have organized. Schweizer told me this morning he would call me back and clear this all up -- he hasn't. We've left several messages.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=politics&id=4804677
Apparently the union isn't big in the Napa Valley because wages and working conditions in its vineyards exceed union demands. This is not a defense of Pelosi. When false accusations are made and exposed, it makes the accuser look suspect. I wish we would check things thoroughly before launching an attack.
This "new tone" stuff doesn't have to be implemented when you're being targeted for destruction. The "new tone" works only when you're clearly in charge--and when it comes to the press, the Republicans are NOT in charge.
I thought Dems were the professional victims. It makes me cringe when we do it.
Our congressman Pombo lost to a rookie dem. Every commercial, and there were quite a few, was about corruption. He never fought it, the idea stuck in peoples minds, and he lost. The war, to my recollection, never even came up.
Hmmmmm.......let me guess. Ex-RNC'er Kenny Mehlman told you.
Right?
Couldn't have been Mel Martinez---there's no word in Spanglish for "genius."
Corruption is just a symptom for a lack of party discipline.
Republicans in Congress just ran hog wild because their own leadership refused to lock their heels, limit their excesses, reward loyalty and punish disloyalty.
This was their leadership in the Congress proper, in the republican party, and ironically from George W. Bush. The latter was the strangest.
I have come to the conclusion that President Bush, with a republican Congress, believed in a strange doctrine that lived, intermittently, in the late 19th Century Presidents.
Simply put, that the President should deal with foreign policy, and leave domestic politics up to the Congress. In domestic issues, the President is just the executive of the wishes of Congress.
To support this idea I can point to three things: the lack of Presidentially sponsored, ordinary domestic policy issues (setting aside the WoT laws); the lack of Presidential arm twisting and vetoes to new laws; and the frequent use of the Presidential Signing Statement, in which he stated how he interpreted the new law and intended to execute it.
But without the discipline and self controls from the Congressional leadership, the republican party, or the President, the Congressional republicans just behaved abominably, and were correspondingly punished in the election.
Probably Kenny. But it used to get repeated alot so who knows where I picked it up.
You don’t hear it so much since 2006.
Rove went to La Raza as GWB's emissary to personally reassure them that US laws would not be enforced for these invaders.
"Genius" Rove's understanding of laws as the glue that holds our democracy together is appalling, perhaps criminal.
CASE IN POINT: On another thread, kellynla wrote: "For those who think just refusing to allow illegals to gain employment, free medical care and welfare etc, they will voluntarily go home......take a look at MS-13, a violent gang that originated in El Salvador, involved in murders and maiming. The MS-13 gang members are here illegally looking for membership, no experience required but must speak Spanish. According to the FBI, MS-13 is operating in 42 states throughout America and expanding! "
It's an outrage that invaders and their cadres have ALL the rights. It's time Americans footing the bills for these invaders have OUR rights enforced by federal law.
We need Tancredo or Hunter to initiate legislation that would impose severe penalties for "hate crimes against Americans," crimes like stealing our identities, cloning our cell phones, fraudulently registering/voting, and looting the tax assets of Americans.
We need to be protected from these criminals. All of these crimes (and more) should come under legislation labeled:
"Hate Crimes Against Americans."
1 - Invaders' using illegal ID or documents
2 - Invaders' Federal income tax evasion
3 - Re-entry into USA after deportation
4 - Obtain/Operate vehicles with illegal ID
5 - ID theft/fraud - Social Security fraud
6 - Knowingly gaining employment fraudulently
7 - Recruiting other illegal aliens workers
8 - Transporting illegal aliens across the border
9 - Harboring &/or housing illegal aliens on American soil
10 - Endangering Americans by undermining US national security
11 - Registering/Voting using fraudulent documentation
12 - Conspiracy to violate federal statutes
13 - Uttering false statements to public officials
14 - Obstructing law enforcement
Nice to know Kenny took time from shopping for satin sheet sets at Bed, Bath and beyond to pimp (oops, I mean pump) up the RNC.
Polarization, in a country which has already demonstrated itself capable of Civil War over political questions, is very bad. If we ever fight another one, Karl Rove will rightly go down in history as one of its architects.That's an interesting take you have on this because my criticism of him actually goes the other way, that he spent too much time emphasizing the organizational side of the campaign and successfully kept Bush out of the political arena. That he is part of the "new tone" of making nice with the liberals.
Do you really believe that in 2006 the Republicans lost because they were too partisan?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.