Posted on 12/11/2001 3:57:17 PM PST by Starmaker
My friend Morton Blackwell, who among his many attributes is Republican National Committeeman from Virginia, pointed out that being GOP National Chairman when there is a Republican president in the White House is the worst of all worlds. If things go right, the president gets the credit. If things go wrong, the National Chairman, and not the president, gets the blame. If you don't believe him, ask outgoing GOP National Chairman Governor Jim Gilmore.
The role of the National Chairman, then, is generally to become a cheerleader for the president and his policies. The National Chairman, with a member of his own party in the White House, does not make policy. That is a good thing. Because the incoming GOP National Chairman, former Montana Governor Mark Racicot, is what Conservative anti-tax activist Grover Norquist once called "The Rockefeller of the Rockies."
Racicot is no friend of conservatives. He opposed a Right to Work bill in the state. He was a big supporter of Goals 2000, the outcome-based education program pushed by President Bill Clinton. The Montana legislature, controlled by the Republicans, killed the program. That didn't bother Racicot. He teamed up with the state's Liberal Democrat Superintendent of Public Instruction and got $6.5 million for the program from Washington.
In 2000, the CATO Institute gave out grades to governors based on their performance in the tax and spend arena. Where did Mark Racicot end up? As the 7th most liberal governor of either party in the whole country. He got a “D”. No wonder. His budget grew twice as fast as inflation and population growth.
In 1998, voters in Montana approved a measure to require voter approval for future tax increases. Racicot not only opposed the measure vocally, but when the voters approved it anyway he challenged the proposition all the way to the State Supreme Court.
The governor signed a special executive order in 1999 singling out homosexuals and lesbians as a protected category when it came to discrimination. And while he is said to be pro-life (he did sign the partial birth abortion ban the legislature passed) he said at a news conference that he had no idea when life began and thus had no agenda when it comes to life issues.
Perhaps most disturbing to Republicans is the fact that he was working hand in glove with Hillary Clinton as she tried to socialize national health care. He passed a companion measure for Montana in 1993, the same year Hillary was enveloped in her efforts to pass her plan in Washington.
If this fellow were to have any policy-making role with the Bush Administration I would be frightened. Instead, he will be forced to defend decisions made by the president and vice president. If given any input ahead of time, he will likely argue against conservative policies. He is not likely to get that far.
The governor doesn't much understand grassroots either. That is good because the Deputy RNC Chairman Jack Oliver does. He has developed a number of interesting programs which have proved of significant value when it comes to turning out the right kind of folks to vote in the election. Presumably Oliver will be allowed to go ahead with those programs and if so that will be a good sign.
Gov. Racicot impressed nearly everyone with the way he handled the media during the long siege of November 2000 when Florida was still in play. He was cool. He was calm. He was collected. And he was tough without ever sounding nasty. If he will perform the same way on behalf the Bush agenda, the president could do a lot worse. And if he starts giving issue advice, he should be told that the president has already made those judgments, thank you very much.
It doesn't take long to dissect and discredit does it?
Racicot was terrific.....bump.
It is true that Montana is not quite the typical western mountain state, like Idaho, or Wyoming in its politics; however, he still must answer for his support of obvious anti-conservative issues and Weyrich asks legitimate questions.
Gov. Racicot impressed nearly everyone with the way he handled the media during the long siege of November 2000 when Florida was still in play. He was cool. He was calm. He was collected. And he was tough without ever sounding nasty. If he will perform the same way on behalf the Bush agenda, the president could do a lot worse. ......I suspect that is exactly what President Bush expects him to do ..... nothing more. So his personal agenda shouldn't be his priority if he is truly a team player and wants to advance the President's.
How would they answer the questions asked byWeyrich??
He opposed a Right to Work bill in the state.
He was a big supporter of Goals 2000, the outcome-based education program pushed by President Bill Clinton.
His budget grew twice as fast as inflation and population.
CATO is one of the lead chicken-littles, doing its very best to frighten the American public into thinking that George W. Bush and John Ashcroft are turning the country into Nazi Germany.
CATO has lost much of its credibility in the last three months, IMO, climbing into bed with the likes of Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, and Harry Browne.
Anti-American losers, all.
I'll just assume Weyrich is wrong, mean-spirited and probably lying about Racicot's record.
The two areas I know he was questionable on were the Right to Work and a hate crimes bill. The hate crimes bill is not a big deal to me one way or the other, and right to work may be a special case in his state, which is heavily into mining....wanting to keep that UMW vote. Neither issue is enough to throw me into a panic.
If anyone from Montana who has useful information would comment, I would much appreciate it.
However, it is as deport said...the RNC follows the President's agenda, so it really doesn't matter that much. His most valuable asset is his ability to speak off the cuff and a tendency to hang tough, both of which will serve us well when he appears oppposite McAuliffe on national television. That is the MOST important thing about his appointment, and I am glad someone thought of him for this position.
Why wouldn't he?
The President is the real head of the Republican party and he wants someone who will articulate and further his views and help get Republicans elected that will advance his agenda.
The President also wants a credible spokesman to explain the party positions on the TV talking head shows, a job Racicot is suited for as he showed in the Florida election fight. Racicot is not a hardcore conservative but neither is President Bush. It's probably a good fit. We'll see.
Also, contrary to popular belief, Montana is NOT a large mining state; quite the contrary, they are strongly anti-mining and have passed anti-mining laws by popular vote.
The state is being over-run by celebrity money and spotted knapweed, both a plague.
But there's an even simpler explanation for putting the former governor in charge of the RNC: Bush likes Racicot. More important, he trusts him. The two became friends in the late 1990s when both were active in the Republican Governors Assn. It was Racicot who first circulated the petition among GOP governors to draft Bush for the 2000 election.
During the election recount, Racicot and Bush sometimes jogged together. They're both casual, plain-spoken men who like sports (Bush owned a baseball team, Racicot played college basketball) and prefer civility to hot rhetoric.
"They have good chemistry," says Marshall Wittmann, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.
And having a good relationship with the president is an important asset for an RNC director these days. The president always runs his party, making the national committee chairman mostly a worker bee. As one politico commented, "Karl Rove runs the RNC, anyway, so what's the difference?"
Racicot, who's more Haley Barbour than Jim Nicholson or Gilmore, gives Bush another trusted spokesman, someone to go on the Sunday talk shows and help get the administration's message out, something at which Racicot has already proved himself adept. For better or worse, the president seems to think that this task is more important than controlling the U.S. Senate.
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.