RealClearPolitics - Politics and Election
Thompson Enters Race From Tonight Show Couch
Posted: 06 Sep 2007 11:49 AM CDT
New York Times
Candidate Who Is Not There Upstages GOP Debate
Posted: 06 Sep 2007 11:48 AM CDT
Los Angeles Times
GOP Cringe at Craig's Bid to Undo Guilty Plea
Posted: 06 Sep 2007 11:47 AM CDT
New York Daily News
'08 Democrats Reuse, Recycle Rivals' Best Lines
Posted: 06 Sep 2007 11:46 AM CDT
Washington Times
Who's winning, who's losing, and why.
The Minus One DebateThe last GOP face-off before Fred Thompson joins the race
By John DickersonPosted Thursday, Sept. 6, 2007, at 7:39 AM ET
If you are a Republican presidential candidate don't irritate Fox News. That was the first message from the Wednesday night debate hosted by the network. Fred Thompson didn't attend the New Hampshire forum, choosing instead to appear on NBC's Tonight Show. In what can only be seen as a delicious act of retribution, the Fox anchors started the evening with an open-ended question to the participating candidates about the former Tennessee Senator. This saved the eight men on stage the trouble of finding the right moment to work in the quips about Thompson they'd prepared beforehand. Mike Huckabee compared Thompson to the country singer George Jones who was called "No-Show George" for missing his concerts." McCain suggested the debate was past Thompson's bed time, a reference to Thompson's supposed laziness, which almost all candidates touched on indirectly as they touted their hard work.
Rudy Giuliani's opening jab was the most damaging. "He's done a pretty good job of playing my part on "Law & Order," said the former prosecutor. "I personally prefer the real thing….you have three leading Democratic candidates, none of which have ever run a city, a state or a business. America's at war. America's got some big problems. It's not the time for on-the-job training as an executive."
After the T-ball round, here's how the top candidates performed:
placeAd2('news/slate','midarticleflex',true)
John McCain: If McCain revives his campaign, his debate performance will be the moment observers seize on as the start of the turnaround. After a terrible summer of staff defections, fundraising woes and plunging poll numbers he declared the debate a "make or break moment." It sounded like the kind of false drama dying campaigns try create before doing something truly desperate and embarrassing. But McCain raised expectations and then met them. He was commanding and in control on issues from immigration to taxes to the troop surge in Iraq which many Republicans believe has been a success. ("Kicking ass," as Bush put it.) McCain took his opportunities to highlight his military and foreign policy experience relative to his opponents—particularly Mitt Romney-- without looking desperate. He was also praised several times by his opponents. Mike Huckabee went on so long about McCain's honor it sounded like the generosity rivals only show each other when one of them is getting out of the race.
Rudy Giuliani: Perhaps in future debates moderators can find an experience in the human condition which Rudy cannot use as a pretext to talk about an achievement from his tenure as mayor. Time and again Giuliani answered questions with data-laden examples of how he reduced crime or cut taxes that he said proved he was tested and ready. Though in past debates similar answers turned out to be inaccurate or puffed up, his concrete facts and details sound commanding and convey the idea that he's a hands-on manager. Plus the cramped format makes it almost impossible for his opponents to refute his assertions about shrinking the welfare rolls or managing the bureaucracy even if they wanted to. The downside: enough already with the bragging.
A voter asked Giuliani about his fraught personal life and he gave what may be his best answer to date. He appeared somewhat sympathetic (useful for a guy with a reputation as a bully) while making the case for why voters should focus on his achievements. "I am not running as the prefect candidate for president of the United States. I am running as a human being," he said, channeling John Hurt. "Any issues in my private life do not affect my public performance."
Mike Huckabee: In the first Fox debate, it was Rudy Giuliani who used Ron Paul as his foil. This time Mike Huckabee engaged in a back and forth with him over finishing the job in Iraq. It was a rare flare of substance and useful conflict over the question of what America owes the Iraqis. Paul-- who the stainless steel Romney might want to watch for lessons in how to display passion-- made the case for withdrawal, arguing that the country should not continue to suffer for the mistakes of a neoconservative cabal in the White House that launched the war. Huckabee, who conceding the mistakes in Iraq, made the case for staying in Iraq by appealing to the country's sense of honor. "What we did in Iraq is we essentially broke it," he said invoking Colin Powell's Pottery Barn rule. "It's our responsibility to try and fix it." Huckabee has been moving up in the polls. He's appealing, amusing and articulates the pro-life position better than perhaps any presidential candidate ever has. This exchange offered a chance for him to show GOP primary voters range—he could speak passionately about the central foreign policy issue of the day. Since debates live on in the sound-bites replayed afterwards, the exchange with Paul is one Huckabee should probably post in the middle of his homepage.
Mitt Romney: No matter how well you do, when a civilian questioner rebukes you it's a bad night. Romney was on his way to completing a competent if not distinguished performance when a father with a son completing his second tour in Iraq clubbed him. "I don't think you fully understand how offended my wife and I were and probably the rest of the people who have sons, daughters, husbands and wives serving in the war on terror to compare your son's attempts to get you elected my son's service in Iraq," he said, nervously. "I know you apologized a couple days later up there, a firestorm started. But it was wrong, sir, and you never should have said it."
Romney, who was already taking heat from McCain for not giving a full-throated support of the surge and whose Iraq answers sounded tentative and unwieldy, had trouble responding. He heaped praise on those who serve but it sounded more like an act of damage control than a response to the father's clear emotion.
This is just too funny?
http://vouchernews.blogspot.com/2007/09/who-is-real-accountability-blogsite.html
LOL
LOL
LOL
Two Videos the Unions Don't Want You to See
1) The Tennessee Education Association doesn't want to be held to a federal "one-size-fits-all" flat buns standard.2) The United Food and Commercial Workers union thinks it can bully a 16-year-old girl.
Posted by Mike Antonucci on Wednesday, September 05, 2007 at 07:07 Permalink
C’mon Mark, I’m not buying it.
Jesse said "After getting caught in his latest spam-fest, Mark Towner is now trying to claim he setup some kind of intentional "trap" to "catch me". (Catch me doing what, exactly, I have yet to figure out.) I'm guessing that in his warped state of mind he somehow thought that if he dropped his entire subscriber list in my lap (and subsequently exposed it to over 5800 other people) that he'd somehow prove his subscriber numbers. All he's proven is that 1) he has a list of 5800 e-mail addresses (a few of which complained about the lastest spamming) and 2) the list doesn't account for the numbers he claimed back in June. In short, he proved nothing except that he still forces people onto his list without permission and is willing to violate the ToS for whatever provider he happens to be on.
Here's where the specious claims continue. He claims that if I ignored the subscription e-mail he sent that I wouldn't have received anything. Last I checked, a "you're subscribed" means just that. He then continues to go further off the deep end by claiming that this list is somehow opt-in. Given that I've already seen at least 3 other complaints about being forced onto the list, I'm skeptical there as well. In fact, the people receiving this stuff at work probably keep on dropping it into the Spam bin. The kicker is that he thinks he can intimidate me (or anyone else logging in with the information he provided) by saying he has our IP addresses. Oh no, some make-believe pirate has my IP address. Whatever will I do?
The real point is that Bluehost will cancel his account for sending spam and he'll have to go shopping for yet another provider. Don't you get it, Mark? As long as you continue to send unsolicited bulk messages and violate the ToS, we'll always have a way to shut you down. The only way to end this is to use opt-in lists only. It's really not that hard and it's certainly the ethical way to go. If you don't clean up your behavior soon, there's going to be nothing but negative about you when someone does a Google search."
RealClearPolitics - Politics and Election
Early Primary Pressure Mounts
Posted: 05 Sep 2007 11:43 AM CDT
USA Today
Winfrey Lends Her Brand and Her Empire to Obama
Posted: 05 Sep 2007 11:42 AM CDT
Washington Post
Thompson Soft on Illegals in Senate Votes
Posted: 05 Sep 2007 11:41 AM CDT
Washington Times
In Turmoil of '68, Clinton Found a New Voice
Posted: 05 Sep 2007 11:41 AM CDT
New York Times
McCain on Iraq: 'I will fight against a date for surrender'
Arizona Sen. John McCain was "glad" that President Bush visited Iraq on Labor Day
NEOLA, Iowa (CNN) — Speaking with reporters at a parade in Iowa on Monday, Republican presidential candidate John McCain reiterated his belief that the current strategy in Iraq is working, saying that to withdraw is to surrender.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/09/03/mccain-on-iraq-i-will-fight-against-a-date-for-surrender/
Thompson entry to be watched for effect on Giuliani
BY CRAIG GORDON craig.gordon@newsday.com
September 3, 2007
WASHINGTON - Rudy Giuliani invited his high-dollar fundraisers to a weekend-in-New-York-themed meeting this summer, and in between the dinners and the golf and the Broadway shows came talk of a man they all were watching warily: Fred Thompson.Thompson's would-be presidential campaign was creating a buzz among Republicans - particularly conservatives hungry for an alternative to Giuliani - and people who were at the meeting said Giuliani's campaign team was relieved Thompson hadn't joined the race yet."They thought they were getting a break that he didn't get in," said one attendee. "They were pleasantly surprised Thompson hadn't announced, and that was July."
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-usfred025357577sep03,0,7804640.story
Giuliani Worried by Fred Thompson
Sunday, September 2, 2007 7:05 PM
Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson officially joins the presidential race on Thursday, and Rudy Giuliani and his team are watching closely to determine how much of an impact his candidacy will have on Giuliani.
"He's a Southerner, and he's a senator, and that gives him credibility," Barry Wynn, a top Giuliani adviser in South Carolina, tells Newsday. "He's certainly weaker today in terms of the level of enthusiasm of his supporters than he was a month ago ... but I certainly see him as serious competition."
Giuliani currently sits atop every major national poll, and is leading decisively in states like California and Florida. But he still faces deep skepticism from conservatives who drive the nominating process. Those are the same people who are likely to be Thompson supporters, analysts say, and that could mean Thompson won't fade any time soon.
"I was totally dismissive of his chance to get the nomination, and I'm not dismissive anymore," Stu Rothenberg, a Washington political analyst, told Newsday. "He's hung in there."
The worry for Giuliani is that Thompson could prove just as appealing to conservatives on tax cuts and terrorism -- with the added bonus of agreeing with them on social issues like abortion and gun control. It's a theme Thompson's advisers already have suggested they will play up, the importance of nominating a candidate who embodies every part of the party's beliefs.
© 2007 NewsMax. All rights reserved.
FRED THOMPSON, JOHN MCCAIN
The Challenging Outlook For Thompson in New Hampshire
When I want to know what's going on in Granite State politics, one of the first folks I turn to is Andrew Cline of the New Hampshire Union Leader (also an occasional contributor at NRO).
I asked him how New Hampshire Republicans are likely to greet Fred Thompson if, as we're hearing, he annnounces the day after the big debate in the state. Some of his thoughts:
It's unclear exactly how much the decision to announce after the NH debate, and not attend it, will hurt Thompson in NH, but obviously it doesn't help him here. The state GOP is the primary sponsor of the Sept. 5 debate. If he wanted to cozy up to top Republicans here, dismissing the debate was a poor way to make a good impression. If he really intends to make a play for NH, one would expect him to come in a day or so before the debate and schmooze big-time with the big-shots. But he isn't doing that. He's made only one visit to NH so far and if he has any real organization here it isn't getting noticed. Does he have any significant GOP establishment backing here? No. Is he actively courting the activists and organizers who can run an effective insurgent campaign? Not that I've seen. So what's his plan for winning New Hampshire? ...
As far as the general public goes, they are unlikely to care too much about him skipping the debate as long as he quickly mounts a real campaign here and wears out several pairs of shoes courting NH voters. But I see no sign that he's planning to do that.
In the past, the real campaign for NH didn't begin until the fall. So historically, Thompson is entering the race (assuming he enters) at the traditional time. But this campaign got an unusually early start, and he is way behind. Romney is very well organized here, and Giuliani has picked up most if not all of the McCain supporters who bolted earlier this summer. So Thompson has to drop in mid-campaign and pick up pretty much all of the undecideds plus pull supporters from the lower-ranking candidates. That's possible, but he's got to have an organization...
It seems like Thompson will be deploying a south-centric version of the Giuliani strategy, not focusing quite so much on traditional early states like Iowa and New Hampshire as big states like Florida (although Giuliani's been spending some cash in the early states lately). Thompson, however, has to realize that a bad performance in South Carolina would break him. He's doing pretty well there, so far.
Unaffiliated Voters of America Party or UVAP?
It’s time to throw the rascals out!
by Mark E. Towner
As many of you know I come from Alaska via Seattle via Japan. Back in the 1970’s time frame, Washington State had two of the most powerful Senators in Washington, Henry (Scoop) Jackson and Warren G Magnusson. They were both Democrats, but were in the leadership ranks in the defense of the United States during the cold war.
There were a number of scandals attributed to Magnuson and the Democratic controlled State Legislature and a grassroots movement created what was called the OWL party.
Once elected in Utah, to continue in office usually depends only on a handful of people who get elected every two years in caucus meetings. These elected officials need only keep these delegates happy and keep getting them elected in their respective precincts to keep their elected nomination positions as incumbents to get re-elected over and over again.
The recent revelations of possible misconduct by our neighboring Idaho US Senator and other Republican elected Federal and State officials scandals now brings to a head the same issues that created a 3rd political party in Washington State. The OWL stood for “Out With Legislators” and was created from both good Democrats and Republicans that were sick and tired of the Party corruption on both sides. The slogan for their campaign was “Throw the Rascals Out”.
This group targeted any Legislator, both local, state, and Federal who’s ethics, antics, and actions were found to be in question, or they were convicted of crimes but refused to step down from office.
I truly believe that we as a country are now at a crossroads in the two major party system. I feel Mitt Romney could be one of the most organized, families oriented and ethical of the current first tier presidential candidates, however the nomination system of the major two parties will likely make it impossible for him to receive the nomination.
As I have commented before on many occasions, the extremes of both parties have captured leadership and fund raising positions making it impossible for candidates who differ on some hot button positions from ever being considered by its respective party’s delegates. Additionally elected officials that have been in office longer and longer become addicted to the power of the position, and actually believe that nobody can do the job better then themselves. They always tend to forget that they were once freshman legislators and learned the ropes, just like anyone can if given the opportunity. You give an honest hardworking person an elected position and they usually rise to the occasion. However with time, (usually 12 years) they become beholding to so many special interests and groups for their re-election fund raising that they can no more blow their nose without asking permission from their key lobbyists. The healthcare problems in this country are a direct result of these elected officials in the pocket of the Industry. A perfect example is Sen. Hillary Clinton received the most money from the Healthcare Industry for her campaign. Have you heard on word from the Senator lately about her healthcare plans?
As a sign of further frustration within our own Utah Republican Party, I have officially changed my political party designation to “unaffiliated” and plan on forming a formal “Unaffiliated Voters Party of Utah” to place good honest mainstream candidates on the ballot to “Throw the Rascals Out”.
We will be seeking like minded “Unaffiliated Utah Voters” to sign our petition to get this new Party recognized here in Utah, and maybe elsewhere in the US.
If you are interested in becoming involved in this effort send an email to uvap@ssl-mail.com
Who are the Unaffiliated Voters?
Unaffiliated Voters seek a non-partisan approach to electing our officials is necessary to secure the future we all want. They have been the major swing vote in every election for the last few decades and now should to be noticed as a major part of keeping our democracy responsive to the needs of the citizens.
We encourage and embrace all Political Parties as long as they move our country forward in a positive way. They also feel that, as an organized voice asking for, and then hearing, non-filtered, full, non-partisan information directly from the people running for each office in this country, it makes the voters better informed before making our voting decisions.
This means we can then vote for the person and not a party.
It also means that the parties must become solution seekers as opposed to the political game playing we have had over our country's history.
Voters should individually focus on the person who can do the best job no matter which color of political flag they may fly. We should be only interested in one flag and that is the flag of our country
The Wall Street Journal August 29, 2007
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Voucher Showdown
August 29, 2007; Page A14
The Utah legislature passed one of the nation's most far-sighted voucher laws in February, and the state teachers union is calling in the national cavalry to help repeal it in a November 6 referendum.
Last month Kim Campbell, the head of the Utah Education Association, schlepped all the way to Philadelphia to speak at a National Education Association convention, where she asked the board of directors for financial support to oppose school choice. Ms. Campbell promised that her campaign to defeat it "will be ugly, mean and expensive," and she needs the outside cash to overwhelm pro-voucher supporters in the state. Look for other liberal activists to pour cash into what will be the most significant state-wide ballot test for school choice in years.
The Utah union chief made her out-of-state trek, by the way, even as one of her spokesmen back home denounced the "river of money from out- of-state ideologues intent on starting a voucher experiment in Utah." Apparently, out-of-state contributions are only tainted when they're used to support something the teachers union opposes.In any case, Ms. Campbell's plea didn't fall on deaf ears. Mike Antonucci of the Education Intelligence Agency, a union watchdog, reported recently that the Utah union's $3 million request for its anti-voucher campaign was approved.
The union's executive director wouldn't confirm or deny the amount when we inquired, but she did volunteer that "we're reaching out to the national affiliate for support and assistance, and we're hoping it will be significant." You can bet it will be. URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118835487241911880.html
