Rove Vows to GOP Leaders: 'No Triangulation'-Bush Not Moving to Politcial Center

Roll Call and ABC News ^ | February 3, 2003 | Mark Halperin, Liz Wilner & Marc Ambinder w/Crabtree

[ewing]

Senior White House Advisor Karl Rove has sworn off the concept of 'Triangulating' his fellow Republicans, the approach to Congress once synonymous with the Clinton Adminstration. [and their top advisor Dick Morris]

At a closed door House Republican leadership retreat last Wednesday, Rove repeatedly stressed that the concept of political 'triangulation' does not work and said that President George W. Bush would not alienate House Republicans by moving to the center, leaving them isolated in efforts to rally the party's political base.

Republican GOP Leadership aides said that the comments worked to reassure lawmakers after the President appeared to burnish his 'compassionate conservative' credentials in last weeks State of the Union address by calling on Congress to dedicate more money to combat AIDS in Africa and develop hydrogen powered cars.

[rwfromkansas]

His faith-based initiative does not aggrevate me. I think it is a good thing.......IF he does it carefully. There are some dangers in such an initiative as well.

[William McKinley]

Agree with you about the betrayal. But I still feel he ran a poor campaign. I saw his debate performances, and they weren't the Schundler I was counted on. I saw him let the tenor of the campaign be dictated by his adversaries.

He's a talented candidate, and he has run good campaigns before. But he ran a poor one that time.

[Redbob]

OK, who's going to mention the Billions of dollars Dubya wants to p!ss away in Africa, in a vain doomed attempt to cure what is at root a lifestyle disease?

[Redbob]

And just exactly how DID that disease make the leap from monkeys and baboons to humans, anyway?

[Carry_Okie]

The barf bag. =)

Well glory be! How cud I half-missed it? ;-)

I jest kinda liked the metaphor attendant to your post, the contents of airline seat pocket for our current political parties.

Evacuation card, Magazine, or Barf Bag? for

Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way (flying green chunk alert!)

Maybe that should be:

Heave, Fantacize, or Get Out.

I can't decide.

[rwfromkansas]

The media makes him out to be some right wing extremist; he is hardly a leftwinger.

[Askel5]

Well ... let's just say there are all sorts of good reasons for Walking, Riding a Bike or just driving a two-lane road all the way these days. =)

[poet]

Ok 2years 5 days, feel better?

[poet]

"Although Bush's worrisome initiatives to limit civil liberties in the Patriot act have caused much consternation in some circles (and not enough elsewhere), at least he's TRYING--and trying hard every day of his Presidency--to fight terrorism. And it's obvious--he's winning."

And the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. When you Swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, there is no excuse for violating that oath!

FReegards

[Jesse]

Typical Bushbot. I do not mind spending money buying things that kill people and destroy things vis a vis defense. I do mind spending money on AIDS in Africa, NEA, more money on Medicare and prescription drug benefit for people who can well afford to buy their own damn Viagra, farm subsidies...

Get the picture?

[poet]

The "Tree" wo;uld have stolen our liberties on a faster more brazen approach. The republicrats accomplish the same thing on a slower pace, piece meal, until we wake up some day and say, wha' happened?

FReegards

[poet]

You accuse me of pissing you off, while the people you admire are pissing "on" you.

Ok, that's fair, why don't you post the good "crumbs" he's given us?

Freedom and liberty are the only important things to me. Take those away and you have nothing but automatons. Orwell had the wrong date by about 20 years.

"Insult the messenger, ignore the message". That is the clintonian approach , which is to say, using personal vilification as some have done.

[legman]

I got the picture. I don't care for the NEA or Farm Subsidies. AIDS in Africa is an enormous human tragedy and he has made his case with me.

The fact is that he is staying consistent with his values. I like that, and so do most people.

Strategy -- Compremise when necessary, take issues away when possible and solve with a conservative solution, and move people away from the left incrementally.

[ApesForEvolution]

Thank you.

[Jesse]

Just curious. There are lots of enormous human tragedies...and the AIDS tragedy in Africa is not new news. So if you are so concerned about it, just how much of your own money have you spent on it?

But there are some other equally horrific diseases you may not know about, so please let me know how much of your money you will dig out of your pocket to address these problems now that I have made a case for them...tuberculosis, malaria, diarrhea (kills more children than any other illness, can be treated with an sugar and electrolyte solution costing less than 25 cents), schistosomiasis, river blindness...then there are the problems closer to home, like those poor illegal immigrants out in the desert who run out of water.

I do not mind that you support these, but I bet cash dollars you have not sent one dollar of money out of your pocket to an AIDS patient in Africa. Classic liberalism...feel good about spending my tax money, but not your own personal bankroll.

Clinton and liberals have great causes also...most of which I disagree with. Would not mind, except they, like you, think it perfectly ok to confiscate my money and spend it for their own personal great idea, never mind what I think. Classic socialism.

Bush is not moving to the right incrementally...he is running to the left at full tilt, with Bushbots providing cover fire and excuses.

[VMI70]

Right, and if he had whores in the place he could have charged a premium. Then he would be declared a marketing genius and would have rocketed up the corporate ladder. Later, he would change his name to Karl Rove and get a job in the White House, but he would never lose his affinity for whoring.

[The Old Hoosier]

Yes, 2000 was an almost unqualified failure, but look at 2002: this all goes well beyond getting Bush out there. It also includes creating issues out of distinctively Bush themes:

(1) Judicial nominations--Saxby Chambliss' staff told me that they got Pat Leahy's name recognition higher than Daschle's in Georgia, and it was highly unfavorable recognition. You can thank Rove here for pushing what seems like an obscure issue, and for the big upset in that Senate election.

(2) Cloning--for years the GOP has run away from life issues. This one was a definite winner in Georgia, Missouri, Minnesota and the Carolinas. Bush had Daschle cornered when he came out against cloning in April. The Dems found themselves on the wrong side of a 90-10 issue, and all the Senate candidates had to do was mop up the mess. Rove has given interviews in which he shows his understanding of "heartland" politics, that social conservatism wins in the midwest and south (and, conversely, that social liberals like Ganske will lose there). And now he's sending subtle signals that he doesn't want Al Gonzalez as Bush's first SCOTUS pick. We can only hope.

(3) Social Security reform--Candidates who took this on boldly (Dole, Coleman, Graham, Toomey, etc.) won their elections, whereas John Thune, George Gekas and other close losers were the ones who ran away from it. Rove had Bush touching this so-called "third rail" as early as 2000. It was a huge risk, but this moved the idea into the debate, allowing what should be a common-sense winning issue to become a reality in the 2002 elections.

There are other issues to add as well. All I'm saying is, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Rove has not pushed Bush to cut the budget, but no Republican--including Reagan himself--ever succeeded in that. It's the depressing truth of the matter. The important thing is, Rove is not taking any of the liberal media's Bullsh!t advice and moving toward the political center.

If you're wondering why Bush got Affirmative Action almost right instead of dead wrong, or why Bush's admin officially opined that the 2d amendment is an individual right, or why Bush proposed a big tax cut last month instead of a small one, or why the worst porkbarreling Republicans in the Senate nonetheless prevented extra 2003 spending in the supplemental last month, or why a pro-lifer vigorously opposed by NOW and NARAL was just appointed to the FDA advisory panel that could affect RU-486 approval, or why Pickering, Owen and Estrada were re-nominated, you can look to Rove.

If you're wondering why Bush is looking more conservative now than he did before, it's because Rove has more say now that Karen Hughes is gone. I'm convinced that Rove understands who he has to please. He has his ear to the conservative movement, and he's following our advice any time he thinks he can pull it off politically. It's better than having anyone else running the show, as far as I can see--do you want Andy Card or some other Bush I retread calling the shots?

[Texasforever]

You cannot reason with the purists. I saw the same reaction of the purists to Reagan. There is no candidate on God's earth that can satisfy the "my way or the hiway" faction of the right. That also goes for the same faction on the left.

[Once-Ler]

"If what Rove did to conservatives in the last election was help I don't want any more of it. He screwed Bill Simon."

Bill Simon screwed Bill Simon.

[RAT Patrol]

Well....if giving up your freedom is inevitable, isn't slower better than faster?