Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush Turns More Partisan With Coming of Elections
Washington Post ^ | 05/19/2002 | Dana Milbank

Posted on 05/18/2002 7:49:27 PM PDT by Pokey78

Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:30 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

President Bush and the White House have set aside earlier worries about the president openly engaging in political matters, launching an unabashedly partisan effort for November's congressional elections.

The change was on full display last week. On Tuesday, word emerged that the White House had approved the sale of a Sept. 11 photo of Bush on Air Force One to Republican donors. That same day, Bush headlined a $33 million, record-setting fundraiser, one of more than two dozen he has keynoted this year and his second in as many days. Big donors received private briefings by senior White House officials and Cabinet members.


(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 05/18/2002 7:49:27 PM PDT by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

another snippet:

But now, advisers to Bush have concluded that he and his staff have no choice but to play an overtly political role in the months before November's elections. Advisers to the president say they have concluded that it is impossible to work with Senate Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) and that they must restore Republican rule in that chamber to have any hope of enacting Bush's agenda.

White House officials "do not have confidence that there is a possibility of governing in a bipartisan way if Daschle is majority leader," said a prominent Republican with close ties to the White House. "The entire Bush agenda for the first term is now hanging in the balance, and that raises the stakes for everybody."

2 posted on 05/18/2002 7:51:13 PM PDT by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
ROFL! Bush is the one turning partisan, isn't he Dana? Gotcha.
3 posted on 05/18/2002 7:51:28 PM PDT by DallasJ7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Bush probably figures what the heck.
4 posted on 05/18/2002 7:53:03 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: Pokey78
So, when Republicans launch a campaign to gain control of the Congress, it's an aggressive partisan maneuver of the most despicable sort. However, Democrats accusing our Commander-in-Chief of the highest form of treason (which has absolutely nothing to do with November, at all) is only right and necessary.

Gag! Gaaaaag!

6 posted on 05/18/2002 7:57:06 PM PDT by MrRepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Bush 'turning partisan'?.....About time, I say....go get those RATs Dubya! Go get them ...big time!
7 posted on 05/18/2002 7:57:33 PM PDT by JulieRNR21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Good.
8 posted on 05/18/2002 8:02:14 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Washington post-politburo?
9 posted on 05/18/2002 8:07:16 PM PDT by Bobber58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The simple reason is that during the first year of his term, President Bush worked very hard to set a new, bi-partisan tone in Washington. After being stabbed in the back how many times (???), he's finally realized that the only way that he can get his agenda through Congress is to make sure that the DemonRATS don't control it.

Mark

10 posted on 05/18/2002 8:14:57 PM PDT by MarkL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
re: your post #2

Excellent, excellent, excellent!!!

The Bush people better go for the throat. This cycle could be the ideal time to bury the scumbag Democrats.

The gripping hands of decent, traditional American families on the lip of the swirling liberal toilet bowl can hardly take any more stomping by the scumbag Democrats. If the Republicans can gain big, maybe there actually is hope for a country that I have come to believe is all but gone. Maybe the decent, working Americans can finally pull themselves out. Here's hoping Bush and company follow through.

11 posted on 05/18/2002 8:15:37 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DallasJ7
ROFL! Bush is the one turning partisan, isn't he Dana? Gotcha.

But of course, only Republicans are partisan. Democrats never are. (/sarcasm).

This makes me want to puke. I am so disgusted with Dems and their lackeys in the press! What a frickin' disgrace.

And W, got get 'em!! Screw Daschle. You once told him never to lie to you. How's it feel to have him stab you in the back? So much for the new tone.

12 posted on 05/18/2002 8:19:38 PM PDT by Wphile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
White House officials "do not have confidence that there is a possibility of governing in a bipartisan way if Daschle is majority leader,"

Somewhat of an understatement, wouldn't you say?

13 posted on 05/18/2002 8:22:49 PM PDT by alnick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Clinton did nothing for eight years but party, cheat at golf, campaign, raise funds, and go on foreign vacations. He attended something like three fundraisers a week, non-stop, for eight years, no matter what else was happening. No complaints from the press then, except to accuse the Republicans in congress of being partisan.

Now Bush attends two or three fund-raisers, and suddenly he's partisan. Go figure.

The only conclusion one can draw from all this is that the worst partisans of all are in the press.

14 posted on 05/18/2002 8:22:49 PM PDT by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
Politicians politicking. Imagine that.
15 posted on 05/18/2002 8:23:25 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
The only conclusion one can draw from all this is that the worst partisans of all are in the press.

I HATE THE PRESS, WITH A PASSION!!

16 posted on 05/18/2002 8:35:29 PM PDT by Wphile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
"The entire Bush agenda for the first term is now hanging in the balance, and that raises the stakes for everybody."

What exactly is the Bush agenda?

17 posted on 05/18/2002 8:40:41 PM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MrRepublic
There's nothing new here. Wait until about the end of October, when the liberal media led by NY tiiimes, and Washington pooost will be screeming that President GWB was in bed with the al qaeda during the 9.11.01 attack. It seems that freedom of the press in this country means freedom to slander a Conservative President in time of war. The liberals never accepts accountability of their actions, thier agenda comes 1st before the security of the USA.
18 posted on 05/18/2002 8:53:54 PM PDT by desertcry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
This story is not true.

The plans to gain control of the senate started the day they learned Jeffords was going to join the Democrats to give the Democrats control of the senate.

Nearly everything Bush has done since then has been to try to get the Senate solidly into Republican control. Nearly everything Daschle has done is to try to hurt Bush while he still has the power to do so.

Bush has been raising money to take back the Senate for over a year. The Democrats haven't a clue about how effective Bush is at raising money. Clinton was the Democrat's best fund raiser because he raised large amounts from many doners. Bush takes a much different approach. Bush recruits fund raisers who raise millions eash. It is the differnce between Clinton's hand made fund raising and Bush's mass produced fund raising. Bush wrote the book on raising funds for Presidential race. He is writing the book on how to raise money for Congressional races too.

Many of you will remember that Daschle was mad as heck at the RNC spending money in South Dakota on the Senate race a couple of months back. The efforts to retake the Senate started a year ago ... not this week. In fact the goal has been to get a working 60 vote majority in the senate. That is a tall order, but Bush is going to try. That was decided the day he won the presidency.

There will be targeted adverstising campaigns done by the best. There will be get out the vote campaigns to an extent never used by Republicans before. There are efforts to neutralize the Unions efforts. The UNIONS have far fewer reasons to bust their butts to elect Democrats. They are not going to do any where near their 2000 efforts for Gore. Unions like the Teamsters and Steel workers at the local union level will not be going all out to elect Demcorats. Bush has taken the tact of not giving the Democrats base a reason to work like heck to defeat him or his people.

Any one who has spoken to Bush knows he wants to change America. In the last 100 years only the Roosevelts, LBJ and Reagan have changed America's political direction. The rest of our presidents have been domestic caretakers. To be a mover and shaker a President has to have 60 working votes in the Senate. That rarely happens. But Bush is going to try. If he fails he will be a caretaker like Clinton and 30 years from now his presidency will not be deemed important. But if he succeeds he will go down as one of the great ones.

But to move this nation a President has to get 60 percent of the public behind him. Since senators are elected by state, it takes about 60 percent support for your presidency to get 60 votes in the Senate.

The Democrats have seen their own polls. They know they must bring Bush's approval rating down to the 50's or Bush may just get it done. Even in the 50's bush may well win the Senate back, but he can only caretake unless he gets 60 votes. But major progess now would give bush a good chance to do it in 2004. A 70 percent approval rating has the Democrats scared to death. They will try ever more outrageous and gambling tactics to try to bring him down.

The problem for the Democrats is they spent all in their efforts to elect Al Gore. To do that they went to great lengths to convince the the persuadeable political spectrum that Bush was a dunce. They played him as a drunken bum ... a spoiled little rich kid. ...as very dumb person who would be a failed president. They got half the population believing that what they said was true.

The problem with making those kinds of attacks is when they fail. For if the fail to defeat and events prove the attacks were lies, the public goes the other way.

Think of the public and a candidate as as if it were a single male and female relationship. Groups react to candidates like individuals.. much like they do to potential mates. Picture Suzy Voter. She is single. She is offered a blind date. The media tells her that if she dates Bush she will regret it. Bush is blubbery, ungly, a bully, stupid, and is a drunk. She is told Gore is handsome, nice, sweet, caring and would be a good father.

But she ends up having to go out with Bush when Gore gets stuck in Florida. When she meets Bush he turns out to be handsome, caring, hard working, gentle and very sexy.

After a few dates she is really attracted to him. The media gets scared by this attraction. The media tells her he is really a very weak guy. They impress upon her that Bush is quite weak and unable to defend her. Then Osama bin BadGuy tries to attack her and Bush kicks his butt in short order.

After this has happened the media has little credibility with the lady. The more they attach her guy the madder she gets.... at them. They can't understand what has happened. Bush has a 70 percent approval rating, and attacks that should destroy him don't. Although the example uses a female and male, with the female lied to, it could just as easily be a male. When an expected blind date is suposed to be fat, ugly and stupid and she turns out to be pretty, with a beautiful figure, very smart, and supportive, it is hard for those that lied to you to make you see her in a bad light.

I have used male female relationships to illustrate my point. But this reaction happens with any human about whom you are lied to. When the people who are lied to find out the truth they will not believe the liar again.

The act of painting a person far worse than they are is what coats a politician with teflon. The demcorats and media coated Reagan with Teflon. It looks like they may have given Dubya a couple of coats too.

If you get caught telling enough lies about a person, the people won't believe you even when you tell the truth.

That will Daschle their hopes.... big time


19 posted on 05/18/2002 8:57:55 PM PDT by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
I hate the press .... Be sure you are not alone. These organizations(the liberal media) of traitors have a lot to answer for.
20 posted on 05/18/2002 8:58:06 PM PDT by desertcry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson