October 10, 2006
GOOD FOR THE GOOSE, GOOD FOR THE SLANDER:
The Gay Republican-Kim Jong Il Connection (Brendan Miniter, 10/10/06, Wall Street Journal)
Politics is all about timing. Apparently, the liberals behind Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the group that received information about Mark Foley's sexual instant messages as far back as April, originally planned to unleash its blockbuster a bit later in the 2008 election cycle. The American Spectator reports that a political consultant with ties to the Democratic National Committee told the magazine: "I'm hearing the Foley story wasn't supposed to drop until about ten days out of the election. It was supposed to be the coup de grace, not the first shot."But as another Democratic operative told the magazine, the political climate at the end of September was suddenly turning ominous. "Bush's national security speeches were getting traction beyond the base, gas prices were dropping, economic outlook surveys were positive. Republicans were back to [holding enough House] seats for a 15-seat majority. In the Senate, it looked like a wash." All that may have played a role in prompting Democratic partisans to speed up the use of opposition research on Mr. Foley that had been put aside for later in the campaign. "Republicans had to have known we'd be looking to change the national debate," says a House Democrat leadership aide.
Assuming this is true, here's a good question you won't hear on the nightly news: In what ethical universe is it okay for a group known as Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington to withhold knowledge of a sicko Congressman until it does the maximum possible damage to their disfavored political party, while criticizing that same party for not going after him earlier?
Just as their are good leaks (NSA surveillance) and bad leaks (Valerie Plame info) in the eyes of the media, there are also good cover-ups and bad cover-ups when it comes to deviant congressmen. It all depends on the letter after the congressman's name and the affiliation of those doing the cover-up (though I suppose there would be a Liberman exemption for the former if some MoveOn-type group caught Joe checking out X-rated movies from Blockbuster).
Posted by: John at October 10, 2006 11:01 PMMatt, it's the same ethical universe that upholds "the ends justify the means" and "Just win, Baby!" as core values. There's only one way to stop it: The Pubbies need to get into "Just win, Baby! Nothing else matters." mode as well, and dig into the trash cellar for goods on Dems.
The Zucker-produced commercial some "GOP Strategists" "disapprove" of is a decent start.
Posted by: Brad S at October 10, 2006 11:02 PMI also sent this story to OJ but he implied it was too small to be a major organized effort.
Even so, glad to see the WSJ (and hopefully others) will run with this to paste it back onto the Dems and convince the voters that this was a last minute stinker from the Dems because they have no agenda to push on their own.
Posted by: AWW at October 10, 2006 11:14 PMBrad S:
I was surprised to see those guys so down on it. With a bit of cleaning up, it would be a stupendous ad. It's funny and damn near impossible to forget. If the Republicans continue to worry, Mr. Zucker should just make a brief introduction at the commercial's beginning, to highlight that this is only his opinion, not a GOP-sponsored production.
At the very least, anybody who saw it would have a hard time forgetting that most elected Democrats are national-security pantywaists.
I would love for the GOP to have shown ads in 2004 explaining, for those who didn't know, who Daniel Ortega is -- followed by the shot of John Kerry shaking hands with him. The Republicans should not allow voters to forget stuff like that.
Posted by: Matt Murphy at October 10, 2006 11:24 PMBrad,
"Just win baby" is the reason the Rs in this pickle.
Whatever the "dirty tricks" squad at the DNC is guilty of, keeping an unexploded bomb in your house is a sign of serious incompetence.
Whatever these revelation accomplish, the damage is done. The Party leadership is exposed as fat, lazy, and no longer ready for prime time.
Did it make people love the Dems? No, but it's cheaper to cost your opponent a vote than it is to get some one to vote for you.
Mission accomplished.
Posted by: Bruno at October 10, 2006 11:38 PMUnfortunately, the debate is now switched to NoKo. We can contrast Clinton's and Bush's policies toward the Dear Leader. I guess, after the MSM and the Dems hyperventilated for a few more days, we'll prove that NoKo does not have nuclear capability after all. But that is enough to focus on which party should be in charge of our foreign policy.
Bush may parade OBL out from his secret location before Nov.
Posted by: ic at October 11, 2006 12:30 AMic:
Bush has what's left of him in a jar somewhere?
Posted by: Matt Murphy at October 11, 2006 12:37 AMAll the GOP needs to do is feed the left's words and video clips back to the voters. The actual pictures of Albright kissing up to the little madman are just as devastating as the cartoon video.
Posted by: erp at October 11, 2006 7:05 AMBruno,
You don't believe that the Dems have unexploded ordnance sitting in their apartment complex? Why do you think references are continually made to "Karl Rove, EEEVILLL GENIUS!"? Hint: It's not for high-minded debate principles. BTW, the idea that it's "cheaper" to cost your opponent a vote smacks of a lack of belief in your own bullroar.
Matt,
Note the scare quotes. Just because some "GOP Strategists" say it's too hot to run (and frankly, it can't be chopped up into a 30-second sound bite without losing the overall message), doesn't mean it won't have its effects. The little games some play with YouTube should give you some hints of its effectiveness.
Posted by: Brad S at October 11, 2006 8:34 AMIf the GOP says the Zucker ad is "too hot" to run, doesn't that guarantee that the YouTube version will be zipping along the email lines among members of the base from now until Election Day?
Posted by: AC at October 11, 2006 11:20 AM"All the GOP needs to do is feed the left's words and video clips back to the voters."
That's all they've ever needed to do - problem is they can never bring themselves to do it. Hopefully Zucker et al will fill that niche.
jp
Posted by: jefferson park at October 11, 2006 12:05 PMPart of the problem is that you need to have a willing media to pass along the "words and video clips" once you make them public. Until recently, that was almost impossible as various elites acted as gatekeepers to make sure that the Dems closets stayed shut while the GOP's were wedged open. That is changing, while the MoveOn™ types are patting themselves on the back for discovering internet versions direct mail and block parties.
And because of their "win at all costs" attitude, the Dems are generally immune from scandals as long as you cast your vote the right way (cf. Byrd and Kennedy).