Posted on 10/29/2006 4:36:20 AM PST by bennyjakobowski
THE call went out to a select band of conservative commentators last week: come to a briefing with the president in the Oval Office. Designed to flatter and create a buzz, the idea was to convey firmness of purpose about Iraq and optimism about the November congressional elections.
“I’m campaigning like mad and I’m looking at people in the eye and saying, you better have a government that does everything in its power to protect you from attack. You’re right here in the office where I get briefed every morning and I’m telling you, it’s on my mind,” President George W Bush told his guests. “I was affected deeply by the attacks of September 11 . . . I know we’re at war.”
Bush revealed that he had been reading A History of the English-Speaking Peoples since 1900 by Andrew Roberts, the British historian who has written a stirring narrative about the doughty nations that took on the Nazis, the Soviet Union and now the Islamo-fascists.
At the end of the briefing Karl Rove, architect of Bush’s 2004 election victory, popped in to exude confidence about Republican prospects at elections on November 7. No matter how sombre the news from Iraq, he has faith in his game plan: trash your opponents’ national security credentials, challenge their fitness to govern and turn out your vote.
Bush may not be as confident as the aide known as his “brain”. “It’s understood that you are allowed to lie about elections,” said one of those present. “I don’t think he is convinced he is going to win.” But the signs point to a tightening race rather than a decisive victory for the Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives.
Tom Edmonds, a Republican consultant, has gone from gloomy to upbeat in the past week. “The Democrats have peaked too soon,” he said. “I wouldn’t want to be on the other side with all this pressure to win the big game.”
The Republicans are shifting their election strategy from the general to the particular in the closing stretch. The issue is not does their side deserve re-election, as even ardent supporters acknowledge they do not. But do voters want to hand power to the Democrats? The election hinges on that question.
Nancy Pelosi, destined to be speaker of the House should the Democrats win, is top of the Republican hit list for being a wealthy out-of-touch San Francisco left-winger who they claim is soft on terror, and for gay marriage and higher taxes. Despite recent efforts to present herself as a homely grandmother and mother of five, Pelosi, 66, is to the left of Hillary Clinton. Her permanently startled expression prompted the blog site Wonkette to run a poll on whether she had had plastic surgery.
Right-wing television chat shows are dripping with vitriol. Pat Buchanan, no admirer of Bush and a former Republican presidential contender, laid into Pelosi for marching in “gay pride parades with the North American Man/Boy Love Association”. A while back she had a hamburger with “strange things” she eventually realised were french fries. She has been mocked for not knowing they can be curly.
Pelosi, a consistent opponent of the Iraq war, sought to shoot down excitable talk that she would seek to impeach Bush if elected. “It is off the table,” she said, describing it as a “waste of time” (as opposed to undesirable in principle).
The idea that the Democrats will seek revenge on the president has taken root with the public. A Gallup poll on Friday revealed that 70% of respondents believe the Democrats will “conduct major investigations” of the Bush administration if they win control of Congress.
Republicans are highlighting the likelihood that key leadership posts in the Senate and House of Representatives are likely to fall to left-wingers. John Conyers, who is in line to chair the House judiciary committee, has drawn up a charge sheet against Bush over Iraq, heavily influenced by the contents of the Downing Street memo, leaked to The Sunday Times, about the “fixing” of pre-war intelligence.
Conyers has been silenced during the election campaign — even on his website, references to Iraq have been deleted on the grounds that the section is being “updated” — but will be back on the war path once the election is over. Other likely committee chairmen to watch are Charlie Rangel on taxes and John Dingell on energy policy (see below).
Gallup established that 45% of voters believe the Democrats will take steps to make same-sex marriage legal, a figure that could be boosted after a court in New Jersey ruled last week that the state has six months either to legalise gay marriage or guarantee marriage rights under another name.
James Dobson, the influential founder of Focus on the Family, an evangelical Christian organisation, said he hoped that the ruling would drive social conservatives to the poll. “Nothing less than the future of the American family hangs in the balance if we allow one-man, one-woman marriage to be redefined out of existence,” he warned.
It is grist to Rove’s mill that “wedge” issues, such as the war on terror and gay marriage, will galvanise the Rebublican base. But what Democrats are calling the “politics of fear and smear” are at their most vicious in a few hotly contested races where ultra-moderate Democrats are seeking election.
Republicans believe they have a good chance of retaining the Senate, where the Democrats need to win six seats to take control. “The election has got really nasty,” said Edmonds, a seasoned campaigner. “I don’t know who will be offended the most, Republicans or Democrats.”
In Pennsylvania, Senator Rick Santorum, a conservative supporter of Bush trailing in the polls, has sponsored a television advertisement depicting his moderate opponent, a pro-life Catholic, next to a mushroom cloud.
Harold Ford, a black candidate running in a tied race for the Senate in Tennessee, is pro-the Iraq war, pro-guns and a Christian who filmed one of his television commercials in a church. His Republican opponent hit back with an allegedly race-baiting advert highlighting Ford’s presence at a Playboy party at the SuperBowl. “Harold, call me,” winks a sexy blonde.
The campaign has been at its dirtiest in Virginia where George Allen, the Republican senator, was once a hot contender for the 2008 presidential nomination. His seat was not supposed to be in play. But after relentless criticism over the “macaca” scandal in which he was rude to a young Democrat of Indian descent, surprise revelations about his Jewish ancestry and criticism for being over-fond of the Confederate flag, Allen last week turned the table on his rival, a writer, for including sleazy sex scenes involving children and prostitutes in his novels.
It was a “Karl Rove campaign tactic”, James Webb, the Democrat candidate and author in question, fumed. “It’s smear after smear.” Although some Republicans were appalled by the attack, they privately conceded that it would be effective.
Webb is no ordinary Democrat. He served as secretary to the navy under President Reagan and voted for Allen in the 2000 election, but turned against the Republicans over the Iraq war, where his son is serving in the military.
If the Democrats stand a chance of taking the Senate, it will be largely due to the efforts of moderate candidates in swing states such as Pennsylvania, Missouri, Virginia, Tennessee and Montana. If they win the House, where they need 15 seats, it will be because Pelosi and colleagues have tacked to the centre.
“The battle is for the ideological centre. If you’re not appealing to moderates, you’re gone,” said Jim Kessler of the Third Way, a moderate Democrat organisation. Republicans are betting that they will still have the edge.
Bush bashers
The Democrats need to pick up 15 seats to take control of the House of Representatives. If they do, key posts are likely to go to these figures opposed to Bush:
Nancy Pelosi, speaker Republican hate-figure in line to be first woman speaker. Pro-choice on abortion and voted against Iraq war
John Conyers, judiciary committee Author of report on the road to war that could serve as the basis for impeaching Bush
Henry Waxman, government reform Attacked abuse at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Has already subpoenaed Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary
John Dingell, energy and commerce Wants to investigate Vice-President Dick Cheney’s secret links to the oil lobby
Charles Rangel, ways and means Critical of Bush’s tax cuts and hostile to Iraq war Bush bashers
And an important question it is indeed.
Do Americans truly want to hand over their country to a gaggle of American-hating socialists who are as close to being communists as possible?
In looking over the entire roster of Democrats in Congress it's impossible to find one that is not completely evil. It's as though to become a Democrat one has to sell their soul to satan and allow their minds to be taken over by the body-snatchers.
Once again, thanks to everyone's friends in the fair and balanced media, we can't have a debate over national security positions, rather we will hear how the GOP is unfair in attacking Dim positions on security.
Since the dims insist on running against Bush, maybe they would help us amend the Constitution so Bush can run for a third term against their candidate.
Even in this typically snarky hit piece the presstitutes have to admit that momentum has shifted to the Pubbies. I love the comment that the Republicans are trashing their opponents' national security credentials. Uh, no, the Dems did that all on their own.
I'd like to know who that quote is attributed to.
I don't believe you can lie about your opponent. You point out their weakness and their political positions that are wrong and let the voters decide.
Lying like a democrat to win elections makes us just as low as they are.
We need to fight hard but as honestly as possible.
"Nancy Pelosi, destined to be speaker of the House should the Democrats win, is top of the Republican hit list for being a wealthy out-of-touch San Francisco left-winger who they claim is soft on terror, and for gay marriage and higher taxes."
She claims that she's for gay marriage and higher taxes.
If I remember correctly, this comment was a joke, and wasn't phrased exactly the way this writer infers.
Obviously someone from the liberal media. That is the attitude that the Dems have, you know.
I was watching that show yesterday on FoxNews about the media, the one with Neil Gabler. He was frothing at the mouth, as usual. He went into a rant about what a mess the GOP has made of the economy. He claims that people have lost their jobs, and personal income has gone down dramatically on Bush's watch.
There is not even a small kernel of truth in that claim.
More of the same from the media. The Republicans are fighting dirty... Republicans are using "wedge" issues...Republicans are....
Funny, no mention of Democrat campaigns avoiding the truth at all cost. Funny, no mention of the outrageous lies Democrats have used to slander this president over and over again.
Just one more article based upon lies that the Democrats are saintly and the Republicans are evil.
Will it ever change??
That must explain the high unemployment rate, the depression, and the lack of optimism for the future that most people tote. /s
Headlines after the election if Pelosi were to become House Speaker:
"Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi hospitalized with severe burns after hooking up jumper cables backwards".
Yeah... When James Pinkerton said unemployment was at a lower rate than the average of the Clinton Administration and incomes were up, not down, Gabler's response was that "Come on... Both you guys [referring to Cal Thomas] know that if a Democrat was in charge you'd be all over him."
Pinkerton had no response to that, but I think your average guy knows what his response would be. It would be "Yeah, we'd be criticizing him, and you'd be talking about what a genius he is, along with the rest of the media."
Well, they know when a shoe has a comfortable fit as do most of us.
It just shows to go ya' how political they really are for no matter how good the economy is they will tote it's demise vehemently as long as it isn't while Democrats are in power. (even if it takes their lying to do so)
Ref. Post #5:
I didn't take it that whoever it was that said that was saying it about the ISSUES!!! I understood them to say that they didn't think he was that certain of VICTORY on November 7.
Anyhow, I didn't care for that statement either.
The momentum was never against republicans to the degree trumped up by the pressitudes. Their demoralization hate campaign against Republicans has not worked out as well as they had hoped. If it was not for the constant drum beat of the Democrat Party press, Democrats would have gone out of business a long time ago and we would have a second party more useful to the Nation.
Sydney Blumenthal just said on Fox News that if the Democrats don't win this election they should find another line of work. Any suggestions on what they might qualify for?
LOL! And trying to jump-start a BOOMING BUSH ECONOMY!
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.