Posted on 07/25/2003 6:39:47 PM PDT by FairOpinion
New GOP Chairman Defends Bush, Accuses Democrats of Feeding 'Steady Diet of Protest and Pessimism'
Rising to President Bush's defense, the new GOP chairman says Democrats are offering Americans "a steady stream of protest and pessimism" in absence of real solutions to the economy and Iraq.
"If you get the impression, the other party has come to the conclusion that what's worst for the American people is what's best for them, it's only because that's their explicit strategy," Ed Gillespie said in his address to the 165-member Republican National Committee.
Gillespie, who as a young activist manned phone banks in the basement of GOP headquarters, was made chairman of the party Friday by voice vote. The prominent former lobbyist replaces Marc Racicot, who left the RNC to head Bush's re-election campaign.
Gillespie, 41, hoped his maiden address would help turn the tables against Democratic presidential candidates who have raised questions about the president's use of shaky U.S. intelligence to justify war in Iraq. Both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney on Thursday made strong defenses of the war, with Cheney telling a conservative think tank in Washington it would have been "irresponsible" not to take on Saddam Hussein.
Democratic Party spokesman Debra DeShong said Gillespie had a lot of nerve calling other politicians negative.
"We have nine candidates crisscrossing the country presenting a positive vision for American. Mr. Gillespie sounds quiet hawkish and adversarial himself," she said.
Gillespie clearly has been cast as Bush's attack dog, the quick-with-a-quote operative who can heatedly denounce Democrats while the president tries to appear above the fray.
Americans "want calm leadership, not heated rhetoric," Gillespie said. "They prefer bipartisan accomplishments, not bitter partisanship. They want a steady hand, not flailing arms."
The finger-pointing came on the third day of the four-day gathering of Republican activists who publicly predicted re-election victory for Bush while privately fretting about political fallout over the ailing economy, the death toll in Iraq and questions about Bush's rationale for war.
Gillespie brushed all that aside with a stinging rebuke of Democratic attacks.
"In place of solutions they serve up raw emotion, and that emotion is anger," he said.
"They're angry that they aren't the majority party in the House or Senate. They're angry that they don't control a majority of the governorships. And they're angry most of all that they don't control the White House," he said.
"So, they offer Americans a steady stream of protest and pessimism," Gillespie said. "They're still protesting the 2000 election. Some of their loudest voices protested removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. They protested a jobs and growth package in Congress. They protest qualified judicial nominees."
He accused Democrats of counting on a weak economy and trouble in Iraq to beat Bush.
"The once-proud party of Franklin Roosevelt, who famously told us we have nothing to fear but fear itself, now seems to have nothing to offer but fear itself."
Gillespie was a general strategist for Elizabeth Dole's successful Senate campaign in 2002 and served as a senior communications adviser to the Bush-Cheney campaign in 2000. He was a communications director for the RNC in the 1990s and worked for former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, before becoming a lobbyist.
How can anyone in their right mind want to have a party, who is rooting for terrible things to happen to us, for their own political gain, to become a party in power. They offer NOTHING positive. As Gillespie says, their entire strategy is to hope and do what they can, including treason, to bring about terrible things for the American People and the US.
Clinton didn't give Bush a pass on this because he didn’t want his record examined or because he didn't want Bush weakened. He gave Bush a pass because the attack had run its course, and pounding on him any harder would backfire. (They will never admit to this of course.)
The idea that a bunch of Dem low-lifes can smear a decent man like Bush with impunity...is obscene.
I say give 'em hell.
I was going to ask which party you were referring to but then I thought it does not matter you described both.
LVM
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.