The stump speech, 2004: Hugh Hewitt tells Republicans how to win their Senate races

There will be competitive Senate races in 2004 in the following states: Alaska, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Nevada and Washington. Of these 13 races, 11 involve seats held by Democrats. Only Alaska and Illinois are in the GOP "vulnerable" category.

Republican candidates seeking to unseat Democrats or fill open seats left by retiring Democrats like South Carolina's Ernest Hollings have to make at least a speech a day between now and November 2004 if they want to win. Most of those speeches are to friendly groups, but many are not. Each candidate needs a stump speech, one which can be used over and over again to guarantee not just applause, but a connection with the audience that endures and even a contribution to speed the campaign forward. Here's my suggestion for the stump speech version.04:

Thank you very much for having me here. My friend __________ was very kind in the words (s)he offered by way of introduction, and I am glad that (s)he was so effusive. It offsets the effect or reading the newspapers every morning.

And I am glad to be in __________. Voters here are crucial to victory next fall, and that victory is about much, much more than my hopes to serve in the United States Senate. The election of 2004 is a referendum on the conduct of the war on terror, and not just in the presidential contest.

The campaign in this state and in all the states in which a United States senator is being elected is also about the war on terror. Simply put, if you approve of President Bush's handling of the war on terror, then send him some like-minded allies in the United States Senate. If you think the Democratic candidate, whoever that might turn out to be, is a better choice to run that war, then vote for my opponent.

But make no mistake, there are two distinctly different views on how to conduct this war. I think President Bush's view is the right one. I think his actions have been the correct ones. I believe the results have been extraordinarily good ones. I want to serve in the United States Senate to make sure the president gets the support he deserves and the support this country needs in a time of war.

There are other crucial issues of course. Even if there was no war on terror, the president would still need help in D.C. to break the obstructionist tactics of Tom Daschle, Patrick Leahy and Carl Levin. On every major issue of the day, the president has laid out a course of workable solutions, and on every major issue the Democrats – despite having lost the elections of 2000 and 2002 – have obstructed that progress for political reasons. On health care, on tax reform, on help for charities and on education, Democrats have put their special interest constituencies ahead of the common good. Tactics of delay and division have been their calling card, and the log jam has got to be broken.

This is especially true with regard to the appointment of highly qualified lawyers to the federal bench as new judges. Until 2003, there had never been a filibuster of an appellate-court nominee in the history of the Senate. There are now five, with more on the way. Two of these blocked judges are great women jurists; one is a Latino immigrant who served Bill Clinton, and a fourth is a state's attorney general who made the mistake of proudly affirming his Catholic faith before the radical Democrats of the Senate Judiciary Committee. All have the votes to be confirmed, with bipartisan support.

But a minority of Democrats, influenced by the radical vision of Barbara Boxer and Patrick Leahy, Ted Kennedy and Patty Murray, Tom Daschle and Chuck Schumer have agreed to block these good men and women because they do not agree with the Democrats' radical judicial agendas.

This obstruction of domestic legislation and judicial appointments ought to be enough to rally voters to my campaign and the campaigns of other Republican candidates for the Senate across the country. But these are not even a distant second to the most important issue of 2004. That issue is national security.

The Democratic Party is simply not serious about the national security of the United States. It pains me to say so, but the party of JFK, Truman and FDR has become a party of isolationists and fanatics, a party of skeptics of WMD and true believers in imperialist fantasies. Over and over again, Democratic presidential candidates and Democratic senators have disparaged the effort in the war on terror and the effectiveness of the administration's initiatives.

To this day, they wonder aloud about whether it was wise to invade Iraq, and to this day – after digging up MIGs and components of nuclear weaponry production, seizing mobile labs and uncovering mass graves – they question whether the U.S. and Great Britain were right to do what they did. Even after David Kay briefed them on the ongoing effort to piece together Saddam's WMD programs, they scoffed and postured as though there was a real debate here.

We need to take them at their word and judge them by their declarations. They would not have invaded Iraq, and it is doubtful they would have invaded Afghanistan with the speed and approach the president did.

Clearly they would not have named North Korea and Iran as members of the axis of evil, and apparently they would have met North Korean demands for unilateral negotiations even after Kim Jung Il's gangster regime was demonstrated to have violated the Clinton accord of 1994.

They would not be seeking transformation of the military, and not one of their number has called for the budget hikes necessary for the Pentagon to be positioned to meet the demands of the multi-front war on terror.

The Senate Democrats have become purely political creatures, opposing whatever the president puts forward, criticizing whatever initiative he undertakes, second-guessing every action and imputing bad faith to any member of the administration who appears before any Senate committee.

It is shocking in peacetime for such hyper-partisan gamesmanship to infect the Senate. It is more than shocking in wartime – it is dangerous.

To such charges of partisan gamesmanship, the Democrats always reply with indignant denunciations of being branded as unpatriotic. Neither I nor any other GOP candidate has ever accused any Democrat of unpatriotic behavior, only of hyper-partisan posturing and reckless disregard for the urgency of threats to the United States. They do not agree on the threats, and thus they are not unpatriotic at all. But they are wrong in their analysis, and thus they remain reckless. And we cannot afford such recklessness.

The threats abroad are large and undeterred. They must be ferociously pursued and destroyed. The U.N. is a welcome ally, but it cannot be an impediment to protecting the national security of the United States. We welcome allies, but will not tolerate obstruction. We need leaders in the Senate, not carpers and posers.

The president needs allies. I propose to become one of those, and while there may be issues on which we disagree, President Bush and I will never disagree because it is to my political advantage to do so.

The Democratic Party was a great party and accomplished great things for many years. But it is unsuited for leadership in these times, and it is dangerous to deny the reality of how far that party has drifted toward an "Alice-In-Wonderland" approach to national security.

Wishing for al-Qaida to go away, for North Korea to abandon its nukes or for Iran to stop building its own nukes will not make those events come to pass. That will require leadership of the sort that the president has provided, and which I propose to support when I take my oath in January 2005. Thank you for your support."

This is a good fundraising speech. Average voters have different concerns and are likely not familiar with people like Senator Carl Levin. The key issues that GOP should focus on in 2004:

1. Economy: Bush is putting people back to work. By 2004, the unemp. rate will be well down from the peak of 6.4%. They key here: The American people are resilient- the terrorists tried to murder our people and destroy the economic pillar of society- but together we have rallied to build America's economy stronger than ever. (American Resilience is along the lines of Reagan's optimistic "shining city on a hill)

2. Keeping America secure: On 9/11, terrorists declare war on America, endangering every American family. President has responded forcefully by routing the Taliban, imprisoning Al Queda members, and prevented another attack on our soil. He led a coalition against a brutal terrorist-sponsoring tyrant in Saddam Hussein that will set the terrorists back immeasurably.

3. Education: Holding schools accountible for the first time in history.

"...To such charges of partisan gamesmanship, the Democrats always reply with indignant denunciations of being branded as unpatriotic. Neither I nor any other GOP candidate has ever accused any Democrat of unpatriotic behavior, only of hyper-partisan posturing and reckless disregard for the urgency of threats to the United States.
They do not agree on the threats, and thus they are not unpatriotic at all. But they are wrong in their analysis, and thus they remain reckless.
And we cannot afford such recklessness..." - Hugh Hewitt

Forget Lieutenant Governor...

Hugh Hewitt for SENATOR!

If you listen to Hugh Hewitt, or read his WND commentaries,
this PING list is for YOU!
Please post your comments, and BUMP!

(If you want OFF - or ON - my "Hugh Hewitt PING list" - please let me know)

Hugh is a solid guy. I would take issue with one note, however.
They do not agree on the threats, and thus they are not unpatriotic at all. But they are wrong in their analysis, and thus they remain reckless. And we cannot afford such recklessness..." - Hugh Hewitt The demoncrats aren't just reckless, they have a completely different vision of what they want this nation to be and they are willing to sacrifice the nation through their continued obstructionism in order to have their vision installed ... if the nation doesn't go the way they want it to go, the nation will not be allowed to go because it is expendable if not made in the mold the democrats demand. If folks can't see that with all we've endured since 9/11 then the democrats have the strategy that will win by default as the nation crumbles from within. [Ask yourself, 'What kind of people defend the indefensible in order to gain political empowerment? What kind of humans will sacrifice the innocent unborn and their confused mothers in order to silence many and service ghouls?' D*E*M*O*C*R*A*T*S

No, Democrats in power are far worse than reckless for they seek to actively grind this nation into dust that they may mold into what they deem the people need rather than what the people want; we will be forced to accept what they deem our rightful need ... and those niggling fools who will resist are to be gradually re-educated through public opinion and pressure created by the ghouls and their democrat servants. No, democrats are far worse than reckless and far more savvy to their agenda of obstruction and devastation that will serve their purposes. 42,000,000 slaughtered children are a statistic that serves them, so they continue to push for increase in numbers!

Mr. Hewitt's words ring true and that is just so satisfying in today's whorish whirl of lies and spin and distortion.

I hope those running on the republican tickets in the next election have the privilege of reading Mr. Hewitt's words-clear, concise, loaded with wisdom and better yet, truth. Our President does need allies-in the worst way. The DNC politicians/candidates he mentions above are a mass of cowardly, special interest group above all else, including our nation's security and constitution. They are destroyers of independent thought, accountability and love for our nation and its foundations. I dispise them. They truly make me sick.

The late great good old dem party that was basically wrong on most issues but truly filled with vision, is now a crumbling, girly man, socialistic, beholden to special interest group criminal enterprise that has no merit, no vision, no dignity and is flat out dangerous to the course America must take to continue our way of life.

The Senate Democrats have become purely political creatures, opposing whatever the president puts forward, criticizing whatever initiative he undertakes, second-guessing every action and imputing bad faith to any member of the administration who appears before any Senate committee.
The threats abroad are large and undeterred. They must be ferociously pursued and destroyed.

Excellent article. Thanks for the pings.

BTTT--GOP insiders, are you listening?

We need to aim for GWB's reelection with 85% of the popular vote and 99% of the electoral college (DC will never vote for GOP), and a complete sweep of Senate races. We need to aim for total victory. The Daschles, Leahys, Schumers, Byrds, and Clintons of the Senate, and the Congressional Progressive [sic] Caucus (i.e., the crypto-socialist wing of the Democrat party) of the House, will never, never, never stop their program of total war against the Constitution -- and thus the USA as presently constituted. What happens when they get the upper hand? They appoint leftist SCOTUS justices such as Ginsberg who decide constitutional questions according to "international legal norms." (This is an impeachable offence, IMHO, by a judge bound to uphold the US Constitution.)

The only way to stop them is to deprive Daschle & co. of their residual power in the Senate.

Rant off.

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.

Hugh Hewitt MEGA PING!!