Creative Problem Solver of the Week
posted by Michele @ 7:38 AM
Maddie's Musings
My own little space where I can rant and rave after watching the news.
About Me
- Name: Michele
- Location: United States
Easy going......unless there is a liberal in the house.
Previous Posts
- The Grinch is Attempting to Steal Christmas Once A...
- Melanie Moves America in the Right Direction
- Pat Buchanan: A man who Ran Before His Time
- The Red Crystal
- Well I thought I was finished with the "Pirate of ...
- Pirates of Somalia
- My Magestic Returns
- Stand United, Stand Firm, Stand Strong
- The Three Stooges Shut Down the Senate
- I'm predicting widespread support for Alito! I gue...
Free Hit Counter
18 Comments:
A Refresher Course on Being in The GOP...The Party of Ideas
GOP memo touts new terror attack as way to reverse party's decline
By DOUG THOMPSON
Publisher, Capitol Hill Blue
Nov 10, 2005, 06:19
A confidential memo circulating among senior Republican leaders suggests that a new attack by terrorists on U.S. soil could reverse the sagging fortunes of President George W. Bush as well as the GOP and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."
The closely-guarded memo lays out a list of scenarios to bring the Republican party back from the political brink, including a devastating attack by terrorists that could “validate” the President’s war on terror and allow Bush to “unite the country” in a “time of national shock and sorrow.”
The memo says such a reversal in the President's fortunes could keep the party from losing control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections.
GOP insiders who have seen the memo admit it’s a risky strategy and point out that such scenarios are “blue sky thinking” that often occurs in political planning sessions.
“The President’s popularity was at an all-time high following the 9/11 attacks,” admits one aide. “Americans band together at a time of crisis.”
Other Republicans, however, worry that such a scenario carries high risk, pointing out that an attack might suggest the President has not done enough to protect the country.
“We also have to face the fact that many Americans no longer trust the President,” says a longtime GOP strategist. “That makes it harder for him to become a rallying point.”
The memo outlines other scenarios, including:
--Capture of Osama bin Laden (or proof that he is dead);
--A drastic turnaround in the economy;
--A "successful resolution" of the Iraq war.
GOP memos no longer talk of “victory” in Iraq but use the term “successful resolution.”
“A successful resolution would be us getting out intact and civil war not breaking out until after the midterm elections,” says one insider.
The memo circulates as Tuesday’s disastrous election defeats have left an already dysfunctional White House in chaos, West Wing insiders say, with shouting matches commonplace and the blame game escalating into open warfare.
“This place is like a high-school football locker room after the team lost the big game,” grumbles one Bush administration aide. “Everybody’s pissed and pointing the finger at blame at everybody else.”
Republican gubernatorial losses in Virginia and New Jersey deepened rifts between the Bush administration and Republicans who find the President radioactive. Arguments over whether or not the President should make a last-minute appearance in Virginia to try and help the sagging campaign fortunes of GOP candidate Jerry Kilgore raged until the minute Bush arrived at the rally in Richmond Monday night.
“Cooler heads tried to prevail,” one aide says. “Most knew an appearance by the President would hurt Kilgore rather than help him but (Karl) Rove rammed it through, convincing Bush that he had enough popularity left to make a difference.”
Bush didn’t have any popularity left. Overnight tracking polls showed Kilgore dropped three percentage points after the President’s appearance and Democrat Tim Kaine won on Tuesday.
Conservative Pennsylvania Republican Senator Rick Santorum told radio talk show host Don Imus Wednesday that he does not want the President's help and will stay away from a Bush rally in his state on Friday.
The losses in Virginia and New Jersey, coupled with a resounding defeat of ballot initiatives backed by GOP governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in California have set off alarm klaxons throughout the demoralized Republican party. Pollsters privately tell GOP leaders that unless they stop the slide they could easily lose control of the House in the 2006 midterm elections and may lose the Senate as well.
“In 30 years of sampling public opinion, I’ve never seen such a freefall in public support,” admits one GOP pollster.
Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin says the usual tricks tried by Republicans no longer work.
"None of their old tricks worked," he says.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) admits the GOP is a party mired in its rural base in a country that's becoming less and less rural.
"You play to your rural base, you pay a price," he says. "Our issues blew up in our face."
As Republican political strategists scramble to find a message – any message – that will ring true with voters, GOP leaders in Congress admit privately that control of their party by right-wing extremists makes their recovery all but impossible.
“We’ve made our bed with these people,” admits an aide to House Speaker Denny Hastert. “Now it’s the morning after and the hangover hurts like hell.”
wow, that person needs some psychiatric help!
Scarey thoughts he has going around in his head, he sounds very desperate.
desperate enough to think his party can win an election with those sort of thoughts.........LOL
God Help Us!
Avoiding detection at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
By DOUG THOMPSON
Nov 11, 2005, 02:28
Wary White House aides, under constant scrutiny from a paranoid Bush administration hell bent on stopping leaks, have turned to a technique used by drug dealers and criminals to avoid detection – prepaid, disposable cell phones.
The phones, which can be purchased for as little as $30 each from discount stores, offer prepaid minutes and can be discarded when the time is used up. They require no contract or sign-up and are difficult to trace.
“It’s about the only way we can ensure any privacy,” one bitter White House staffer told me this week. “Our office and home calls are monitored along with our normal cell phones.”
Enterprising White House staffers have pooled their resources and use third parties to purchase the phones in bulk from retailers like WalMart in small towns outside the National Capital Region. When one phone’s minutes are used up, they toss the handset and activate a new one.
Drug dealers and organized gangs use such phones to avoid wiretaps and call monitoring by law enforcement agencies. That White House aides have turned to the same techniques indicates just how tense life in the West Wing has become.
“Every time a new story emerges in the press, everyone here comes under suspicion,” says one aide. “We spend most of our time covering our asses instead of tending to the nation’s business.”
White House sources tell us that even senior aides like embattled Presidential advisor Karl Rove uses the prepaid phones to avoid having certain calls show up on call logs or other records that might be subpoenaed.
“You do what you can to avoid leaving a paper trail,” says one aide.
Other techniques employed by administration officials to avoid detection include:
--Free email accounts through services like Hotmail, Lycos, Yahoo and Gmail. Staff members create multiple accounts and create new ones often.
--Increased use of cash instead of credit or debit cards. “Gas receipts can show where you’ve been. When you pay cash there’s less of a trail to follow,” says one staff member.
--Use of cars belonging to friends or increased use of public transportation like the Washington metro system because “it’s easier to get lost in a crowd.”
“I know this all sounds like a dime store novel but that’s the depth we’ve all sunk to around here,” says an aide who has worked in previous administrations as well as on the current White House staff.
One female staffer says working at the White House has gone from “the most exciting time of my life to a daily hell. You’re always being watched, always under suspicion, always second-guessed. I hate it now. I just want it to be over.”
so what? They are finally using their smarts!
You must be on drugs and very paranoid...
ahhhhhhhhh the name calling liberals - no agenda just names and bad ones at that
They really need a director of creativity.
Grand Old Spenders
By George F. Will (Conservative)
Thursday, November 17, 2005; A31
The storm-tossed and rudderless Republican Party should particularly ponder the vote last week in Dover, Pa., where all eight members of the school board seeking reelection were defeated. This expressed the community's wholesome exasperation with the board's campaign to insinuate religion, in the guise of "intelligent design" theory, into high school biology classes, beginning with a required proclamation that evolution "is not a fact."
But it is. And President Bush's straddle on that subject -- "both sides" should be taught -- although intended to be anodyne, probably was inflammatory, emboldening social conservatives. Dover's insurrection occurred as Kansas's Board of Education, which is controlled by the kind of conservatives who make conservatism repulsive to temperate people, voted 6 to 4 to redefine science. The board, opening the way for teaching the supernatural, deleted from the definition of science these words: "a search for natural explanations of observable phenomena."
"It does me no injury," said Thomas Jefferson, "for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." But it is injurious, and unneighborly, when zealots try to compel public education to infuse theism into scientific education. The conservative coalition, which is coming unglued for many reasons, will rapidly disintegrate if limited-government conservatives become convinced that social conservatives are unwilling to concentrate their character-building and soul-saving energies on the private institutions that mediate between individuals and government, and instead try to conscript government into sectarian crusades.
But, then, the limited-government impulse is a spent force in a Republican Party that cannot muster congressional majorities to cut the growth of Medicaid from 7.3 to 7 percent next year. That "cut" was too draconian for some Republican "moderates." But, then, most Republicans are moderates as that term is used by persons for whom it is an encomium: Moderates are people amiably untroubled by Washington's single-minded devotion to rent-seeking -- to bending government for the advantage of private factions.
Conservatives have won seven of 10 presidential elections, yet government waxes, with per-household federal spending more than $22,000 per year, the highest in inflation-adjusted terms since World War II. Federal spending -- including a 100 percent increase in education spending since 2001 -- has grown twice as fast under President Bush as under President Bill Clinton, 65 percent of it unrelated to national security.
In 1991, the 546 pork projects in the 13 appropriation bills cost $3.1 billion. In 2005, the 13,997 pork projects cost $27.3 billion, for things such as improving the National Packard Museum in Warren, Ohio (Packard, an automobile brand, died in 1958).
Washington subsidizes the cost of water to encourage farmers to produce surpluses that trigger a gusher of government spending to support prices. It is almost comforting that $2 billion is spent each year paying farmers not to produce. Farm subsidies, most of which go to agribusinesses and affluent farmers, are just part of the $60 billion in corporate welfare that dwarfs the $29 billion budget of the Department of Homeland Security.
Brian Riedl of the Heritage Foundation reports that Congress responded to the Korean War by setting priorities, cutting one-fourth of all nonwar spending in one year . Recently the House failed to approve an unusually ambitious effort to cut government growth . This is today's ambitiousness: attempting -- probably unsuccessfully -- to cut government growth by $54 billion over five years.
That is $10.8 billion a year from five budgets projected to total $12.5 trillion, of which $54 billion is four-tenths of 1 percent. War is hell, but on the home front it is indistinguishable from peace, except that the government is more undisciplined than ever.
Gerard Alexander of the University of Virginia wonders whether conservatives' cohesion is perishing because it was a product of the period when conservatives were insurgents against dominant liberals. About limited-government conservatism, he says:
"Perhaps conservatives were naive to expect any party, ever, to resist rent-seeking temptations when in power. Just as there always was something fatally unserious about socialism -- its flawed understanding of human nature -- is it possible that there has also been something profoundly unserious about the limited-government agenda? Should we now be prepared for the national electoral wing of the conservative movement -- the House and Senate caucuses and executive branch officials -- to identify with legislation like the pork-laden energy and transportation bills, in the same way that liberals came to ground their identities in programs like Social Security?"
Perhaps. But if so, limited-government conservatives will dissociate from a Republican Party more congenial to overreaching social conservatives. Then those Republican congressional caucuses will be smaller, and Republican control of the executive branch will be rarer.
perhaps,
but the Democratic Party is going to have to put up a candidate that makes sense first - and that's their whole problem....
How do you know that person is a Dem? Plus, are you sure all of the "anons" are the same, because I'm one of them and I didn't "cut and paste" anything?
You're right, I need to get a "handle", but I've yet to figure out how. I assumed you had to start your our blog to do that, so I didn't do it. I can type, though, so I figure I'd get started doing this "blogging" thing.
To be honest, though, I see the same behavior by both parties, depending on which blog you peek in on, so I'm a bit disinclined to get involved in the whole process. I’m an old man (comparably), and I wasn’t raised to “discuss” items in this way. Too many people paint their opposition in broad strokes. I know people with views from both sides of the aisle, and they’re all good people. I have a distaste for people calling all “libs/Dems” or ”righties” anything. It’s ignorant, as well as disrespectful to all American people. I’m old enough to know that people come to different points of view throughout their life. My own views have shifted throughout the years, whether it is on the death penalty, abortion, welfare, etc…. I like to think that regardless of my views at the time, I was never a “bad” person. Disagreeing with someone does not make them evil or treasonous. To be honest, I think this country has gone mad.
To take your example of your friend, s/he tried to force you to think of a far reaching example to get you to change your stance on the gay parenting issue. I agree, you don’t simply change your underlying views based on some outlying circumstance. But the same could be said for the argument being thrown around supporting torture, the so-called “what if someone knew about a nuclear bomb” argument. Do we sanction torture in all instances in the chance that this situation will arise?
Take this as an analogy: Let’s say I’ve been at home drinking a few beers (four, for the sake of the argument), and I’m feeling good watching the big game when I get a phone call. My wife has forgotten her heart medication and needs it immediately or she will die. I’m legally too drunk to take the pills to her, but there’s no time to spare calling others to come pick me up, etc…. I can tell you that in that case I would haul my not-so- sweet caboose to my wife with her medication. Now, from what I’ve gleaned from some of the “arguments” being posited lately to justify torture, some could argue against drunk-driving laws based on the restrictions of life-saving in the rare cases like I just imagined.
I served in Korea and I know the horrors of war and torture and it should never be officially sanctioned. All military personnel should abide by the non-torture guidelines as written in the handbook. In rare cases (nuclear bomb somewhere), I’m sure the CIA will do what they have to do to get the information, even if it’s against the law (but remember, they play by different rules altogether anyhow). To change our military’s position on torture, though, is damned foolish. I don’t care what anyone has to say on that matter, especially those who have never booted up. Even the Korean men I fought against didn’t deserve that. Not to mention that it would have led to our boys getting the same.
My advice would be for everyone to cool off and try to listen to the people on the other side. It sounds to me sometimes that we seem to want to help others in other countries more than we want to even listen to our own people in this country, regardless of which side of the aisle you lean towards. Maddie, I hope you take this to heart without offense, but there is way too much mudslinging and accusations happening in here. I stumbled in from the GOP website since you are a big contributor there, but I have been disappointed. It’s not all your doing, obviously, but you need to exercise some more judgment before you attack everyone who thinks differently than you do. And this comes from someone who has spent more time on your side of the aisle than you have.
God bless this country, as we need the blessings now more than ever.
comment taken and you are welcome anytime.......
however......LOL, I bash with a sense of humor
I do however believe that winning this war in Iraq is of the utmost importance -
torture? no I don't think the troops should be involved in that - however, if there was a secret group of people who did that sort of thing to get information that might be helpful, and I didn't know about it...well - in extreme cases of importance - I would agree not to know about it and hope that it existed
Mudslinging? I don't just sling mud - LOL I've written some very nice complimentary pieces about people.
Both Maddie and Moose are big on "why is is it that Dems always do this" or "Libs don't care about the country" and things like that. Anyone who presents any opposing view gets assailed in here. This is a disfunctional family for sure.
I'm with the old guy. This country needs blessings more than ever.
Yes, this country does need blessings. If you read my blog entries and comments; you will find that the attackers have been from the left.
Check it out! :)
I have lashed out at liberal leaders who I have felt were out of line; but for the most part, caring and compassion have been my way when it comes to America.
I think you are lacking an understanding of who just is doing the attacking. Perhaps a course in reading comprehension may help.
Hi There,
I'm actually the son of "the old guy", whom I encouraged to try blogging in the first place. He raised his children to not sit idly by and complain when you can try to learn from others and make a difference, so I thought this would be a good forum for him to share his experiences with others. I’m sad to report that has lost the will to be involved in blogging any longer after reading many of the posts in this blog, and others similar to it. For the record, he agrees that Maddie doesn’t generally get involved in the mud slinging, but that she is the source of all of the topics of “discussion” in here, and rarely misses an opportunity to paint liberals as being either disloyal to this country or being down-right treasonous. Along with el_mooser, many of the other posters simply argue their side with no reverence for the opposing views, again resorting to accusations of being weak Americans in the end. On top of that, many of the “anonymous” posters have little intellectual fare to share either.
If he had spent enough time in here, he would tell you what he’s been telling us for the last 15 years: that all the “bums” need to be thrown out of office. Non-conservative “conservatives” and non-idea having Democrats are both hurting this country, but people who refuse to hold everyone accountable, instead of simply going after the weaknesses of their enemies while ignoring the shortcomings of their own party, are the real problem in this country.
If you have ever made a statement regarding how “all Dems do something” or “all Republicans act this way or that”, then you are a part of the problem. As I stated, Maddie, you do not often engage in this behavior, but you consistently encourage this behavior by instigating the message with the posts that you make. You have made claims to being both conservative and a Libertarian in the past posts that we read, but instead of holding the politicians in our party accountable, you assail the Dems for having no acceptable alternative. This country deserves better, which is why the President’s approval rating is so low. I am a true conservative, so I will not stand for false conservatives who change their arguments day to day. Sure the Dems do that too, but I need to hold my party accountable if I am to stay in it. At the same time, I don’t think all Democratic ideas are bad. This country needs a balance between the two parties if we are to survive and do well. The practice of calling the opposition every name in the book and accusing them of being anti-American is shameful on this country.
I don’t expect anything to change, which is why “the old man” and I will no longer make an attempt at this “discussion”. It’s a sad state that this country had arrived at, but the solution is not to be found in here I’m afraid. Nevertheless, may God bless you and may you finally find compassion in your hearts to stop all the foolishness.
In total agreement with you Mooser. What fun I have poked at libs, example Cindy Sheehan, Teddy Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid etc., was for a reason. The reason was their statements and accusations. I was standing up for what I believe. Old man and his son need to lighten up a bit. I think i've been critical of this administration too, i.e., spending, borders, not enough work in Sudan, etc.
For some reasons, there are some who can't read between the lines, refuse to realize that you just can't throw every one out of the government. George Bush was the only one on the ticket this past election who was electable. Yes, there are Democrats who have earned my respect, but they are the ones who have shown respect. Miller, Lieberman, (well I know there are a few more) LOL, but there are those who by opening their mouths and spewing lies, who deserve to be made fun of and talked about.
So there!
I think if your father lost his interest in blogging - it is not due to my site; LOL Glad he didn't visit the Democratic Underground, the DNC site - cause it really gets nasty there.
Perhaps he should visit zone.com for a game of cribbage or checkers. I really don't think that anything that Moose and I have stated was rude or degrading. I've always viewed myself as a person with a sense of humor. I post what interests me; or where I feel some have put the wrong message out. I believe your dad and you have really taken this blog thing way too seriously.
Merry Christmas to you both! Hope you find what you are looking for in this crazy world!
Paranoid?
LOL
Post a Comment
<< Home