Posted on 10/23/2006 2:54:57 AM PDT by Hadean
Republicans have been promising they would ratchet up the rhetoric against Democrats in the final two weeks of the fall campaign, and the man President Bush called "The Architect" of his political campaigns offered a preview of what they have in mind on Friday night.
Appearing in support of embattled GOP Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.), Karl Rove offered biting jibes against House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), took a shot at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and asserted that Democratic policies would leave the country weaker.
"You can't say I want to win the war but not be willing to fight the war," said Rove, Bush's top political adviser. "And if leading Democrats have their way, our nation will be weaker and the enemies of our nation will be stronger. And that's a stark fact, and it's the reason that this fall election will turn very heavily on national security." [continued below....]
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was supposed to be the speaker at the dinner and rally, but he canceled, pleading a scheduling conflict, the Buffalo News said. McCain did speak to the rally by telephone, praising Reynolds as "one of my heroes."
Rove stepped in at dinner and used his speech to road-test new lines of attack on the Democrats. The basic themes -- that voters face a stark choice between the parties on taxes and terrorism -- have been a Bush standard. But Rove, who once claimed liberals preferred "therapy" to war against terrorists, delivered them with an acerbity not seen from his boss.
For instance, he needled congressional Democrats for voting against a GOP plan to try terrorist suspects at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba. Many Democrats said the plan violated basic rights, but Rove rejected that. "You need to have the ability to try these people without worrying about the ACLU showing up saying, 'Wait a minute, did you Mirandize them when you found them on the battlefield,' " he said. "With all due respect, I don't happen to remember that in World War II, that when we captured Nazis and Japanese and took them to camps, that the first thing we did was provide them legal aid."
He also went after the would-be House speaker for voting against renewing the USA Patriot Act, the warrantless wiretapping program and the war in Iraq. "With a record like that, you can see why Nancy Pelosi wouldn't want this election to be about national security," Rove said.
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly responded, "Clearly, the White House is getting desperate to keep their rubber-stamp Republican Congress."
"Representative Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, who is in line to become speaker if her party wins the House, has put out the word that no one should be talking with too much certainty or detail about the days after Nov. 7. But even Ms. Pelosi has slipped on occasion. In a recent interview with The Associated Press, when asked which suite of offices she would use as speaker, she said with a laugh, “I’ll have any suite I want.”
Glenn Close as Cruella de Ville couldn't get off a laugh like that.
A good read
1. McCain is a coward.
2. McCain isn't the draw that Rove is.
3. McCain is such an alienating figure that in a close race a candidate can't afford to be seen with him.
If the president and his Iraq policy were as unpopular as the so called polls say he is, I would think she would be out front demanding impeachment hearings.
This is support for my view that while 44 percent approve of the job the president is doing that perhaps as many as 20 percent more voters think he is not being aggressive enough in Iraq.
I keep going back to the last time we had a war president. Nixon's job approval was in the mid 30's when he ran for reelection in 1972. But on election day he got 60.7 percent of the votes. It turned out that only 35 percent agreed with his policy in Viet Nam but an additional 25 percent thought he should carpet bomb north Viet Nam and do what ever it took to defeat North Viet Nam quickly.
When it came time to vote those voters could not vote for cut and run McGovern. They voted for Nixon.
I find it quite telling that Pelosi is anti-impeachment and put out the word that if she is speaker Murtha will not be her main assistant.
That tells me that Pelosi knows that cut and run as a policy for the war in Iraq is not a winner at the polls.
I have for years told people that if you want to know what is happening look at who is changing campaign plans and why.
I think the research shows that most voters want to win in Iraq. That is why the president is investigating a new strategy to win.
It is also the reason that Pelosi is distancing herself from Murtha and is offering a pledge not to try to impeach the President. Murtha is Cut and Run. Her buddy Murtha has to be thrown over the wall in her attempt to win.
That seems to say this election is very close and perhaps even a slight edge in favor of Republicans. That is what the actual actions of President Bush and Nancy Pelosi seem to support.
The actual actions of the players in an election are far more accurate than media polls.
An attack dog like Giuliani is needed, not the polite PC wussies that are in charge.
:)
3.
:)
On O'Reilly's interview with the President, the President commented that he felt a lot of people were unhappy with the war because they wanted to WIN. This supports your analysis, and I don't think the President just said that based on intuition...I would bet that their private polls actually ask WHY people are unhappy, unlike the MSM polls.
I think #3 is the most likely. You have to get those broken glass people to the polls, and while Rove (the magnificent etc.) can do it, McCain keeps them home.
Definitely 3.
I hate McCain w/ a passion.
I don't care what Bill Kristol says, I would vote for Lamar Alexander before McCain in a primary.
My two cents - we have to make everyone there totally fear us. It may sound drastic but if these terrorist scumbags take over a city or a section of the city, than we have to totally raze that area down to the ground.
It's just a thought and probably a stupid one. I am not on the ground so the Freepers who have contact with those who are - what are they saying? Are military commanders not doing their job? Are they afraid to speak their mind to Rummy and the President? Are there Clinton holdovers within the military and DOD, who are undermining our effort?
I was listening to Bill Kristol on FNS yesterday. He said after the election, Rummy will go. Brit basically scoffed at him and said that's what you said in the last election.
Yes wait until 2010 when he is up for reelection. The GOP does not have a better candidate (again) and he wins the primary. People will begin to complain about him, but most will say "You must vote for him anyway". I can see it now. That is exactly what they say about DeWine, Chaffee, etc. I guess Arizona might be in the nose holding circle too.
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.