Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Evening News: McCain ads running in Iowa!

We have visual confirmation that the new McCain ad is, indeed, running in most of Iowa.


Will Fox and CNN retract their stories?


Anonymous said...

Been to any meetings Uncle Ted???

I hear there was quite the love fest last night

Gopaul said you didn't even flinch much.

RF said...


I read today’s Yepsen column with interest. Since you got a mention, I would be interested to hear your take on the column and the issues it covers.

Anonymous said...

Saw that too. Wondering what the blogs are going to say about it.

So far, the only thing I can find is by the folks over at Flyover Country.

They don't have much insider info though. Was anyone there?

The Inside Dope said...

Is this the "Safe" ad where the first words out of McCain's mouth are "Only a fool or a fraud talks tough or romantically about war."??

I thought that was great, as it's clearly directed towards Bush.

There's numerous examples of Bush trying to play tough guy, most notably "Bring 'em on!"

And who can forget Bush's immortal words to our troops in Afghanistan, "It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks."

Yep, only a fool or a fraud talks tough or romantically about war.

Grant Young said...

FYI McCain has been running ads here for like 2 months.

Art A Layman said...

hey guys:

Would like to express my sympathies for all your weather problems and the disaster at the Boy Scout camp.

Anonymous said...

Art your just disappointed because that mean fewer boys out there for you to hit on! Go ome you don't have a clue!

Art A Layman said...

anon 12:17:

I understand that graciousness is not a conservative trait.

BTW, I prefer older men.

Art A Layman said...


I would like to correct your vaunted candidate. He stated today that if we follow his course our servicemen will come home with victory and honor, not defeat.

Let me suggest to the good Senator that regardless the conditions of their coming home, they will come home with honor.

Anonymous said...

I'm chuckling a bit about the Yepsen article. He really should reveal that he has a personal stake in his story and isn't reporting anything. Remember, he has his own wing of the party that he calls Mainline, we call Yepsen republicans - ya know the ones that have a "life".

He chides that the GOP is only about Guns God and Gays. But, why doesn't he chide the democRATs who are only about Guns (ban them) God (ban Him) and Gays (promote the lifestyle).

They are a single issue only party. The only thing they care about is abortion. It's sick. Remember how they treated their most qualified Gov Candidate? They took the big lug over the brain because the brain is pro-life.

Why don't you spend some time chiding them over their pro-death platform?

What does Mainline mean anyway? It means - I'm a pro-abortion person. What on earth is the point of the labels?

What issues do Mainline republicans care about? What differences do they have? No one can ever explain it. I wonder why.

Anonymous said...

It appears that Iverson is campaigning for something. Why take this internal fight to the newspaper? He called Yepsen to tell him about it. What was his reasoning for highlighting a family argument to the public? If he's for unity, why did he bully himself into that meeting when he was expressly not invited and start the fight? Why is he trying to destroy Steve Schefler? What are his motives?

How does taking this fight to the register help McCain win Iowa?

Doesn't he realize he's galvanizing an already galvanized group of people who will overcome flooding to vote at the convention.

Why did Iverson go to war with his own party? What kind of party leader does that? That is not leadership on any scale.

Iverson has very bad integrity, very bad instincts, ver bad ethics and very bad manners.

I wonder why Iverson didn't share with Yepsen all the lies he's been telling people since he got elected, er I mean, selected.

Anonymous said...

Guess what has changed in a year? The Iowa Democrats raised all kinds of fees and taxes and now, people are having trouble paying their property taxes.

Iowa democrats just don't care about real people with real lives and living on fixed annual salaries that don't go up as much as they do for Gov't workers. How much of a raise did they give themselves again?

This is what you get with a democrat controlled legislature.
The number of Polk County properties with delinquent taxes is up 14 percent to 5,312 from last year, Polk County Treasurer Mary Maloney said. The total dollar amount owed is up 15.5 percent to $7.95 million.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Yepsen ought to be more concerned about how poorly his employer is doing and how bad his pension is going to be. Perhaps the register might want to consider having columnists more interesting than Yepsen and perhaps people might start reading it again.
Gannett Co. Inc., parent company of The Des Moines Register, said it will freeze the company's pension plan on Aug. 1...

Freezing the pension plan will save the company about $90 million in 2009...

Anonymous said...

That's ok Dave. They are going to give you more shares of nearly worthless and getting more worthless all the time - Company Stock - instead of your pension. Now, that's a deal, by golly.

Didn't the people at Enron go to prison for that?


Employees will now receive a 100 percent match in Gannett stock on employee contributions of up to 5 percent of their salary. The existing plan gives employees a 50 percent match in Gannett stock to employee contributions of up to 6 percent of salary.

Anonymous said...

First, Iverson turns into Senate Minority leader because under his leadership he lost the majority.

Then, Iverson loses his Senate leadership position - fired by his own peers.

Then, he loses his Senate seat - fired by his republican friends and neighbors.

He loses his job with Romney because well...under his wonderful leadership, Romney lost to someone no one had ever heard of before.

He bullies and lies his way into RPI leadership by telling bunches of lies that have since been exposed and the truth discovered by those to whom he told the lies.

Then, he starts a civil war in his own party with the people who bring the most voters to the by taking his dirty laundry to the press so what.....Yepsen will feel sorry for Iverson?

The "Mainline" republicans that Yepsen yearns for and Iverson tries to pretend to be - have lost lost lost and will lose some more.

So, who's mainline? The ones that vote or the ones that lose votes?

Seems to me Sheffler is the Mainline Republican and Iverson and Yepsen are out of touch and all alone out there with their kind of politics.

Anonymous said...

That has to be one of the funniest lines I've ever read on this blog - "Sheffler is the Mainline". Oh My God - that's like calling Pelosi a moderate.

Anonymous said...

Scheffler controls a crowd of people that demand lot and show up at everything and get their picture taken .....but where are the phone calls....the door knockers.....hmmmmm

Anonymous said...

Nancy says she's a moderate. Don't you believe her?

Anonymous said...

8:08 - that is just plain factually false - a lie. They make their calls for their candidates because those candidates agree to help pass their agenda. Perhaps they don't come down to RPI to do RPI calls because RPI has some sort of agenda - please do tell us what that is, by the way - so they can be mistreated by unpleasant staffers.

Sounds like there aren't any mainliners. I don't know what they want.

I don't see them at conventions.

I don't run into them at parades.

Who are these people who feel so encroached upon?

Do they only show up for the dinners for pictures? Is that the only place they go? Who are those folks who are more deserving of pictures than the people who do the work that you disdain so forcefully?

Anonymous said...

The reason there aren't any mainliners is that the religious freaks have scared them away from the party. They are fed up with the Bush apologists and have been suffering through 8 years of buyers remorse. They are looking for fiscal conservatives - not Jesus freaks who think gay marriage will be the end of the world. Most of them are embarrassed that they bought into the fear mongering 4 years ago and aren't very excited about McCain. Hard to get excited about making phone calls and knocking on doors when you feel that way.

Tony Stark said...

Iverson has provided outstanding leadership for the party! What do you fools think the Chairman of the party is supposed to do? I know - Raise millions of dollars - because that's what it takes to have a quality organization. ICA power is taken away because they lose the slate - Halleluyah!
"They say that the best weapon is the one you never have to fire. I respectfully disagree. I prefer the weapon you only have to fire once. That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it... and it's worked out pretty well so far."

Anonymous said...

The mainline republicans are sitting back and watching the religious right lose elections. They have a litmous test and then they tend to eat their own. The evangelicals took over the party and now they don't have enough time and talent to do both their work and party work.

Anonymous said...

The party needs to send Ted,Steve,Kim,and the ITR packing.

Anonymous said...

Iverson is doing Great. Funny thing is he is a social conservative, but he also knows that they need to grow the party and having hardliners that are unwilling to accept anyone the does not know the issues or has a different view or idea is completely destructive. As for Sporer, Lehman, and Scheffler they have been power hungry and are smelling the money from national party and McCain and they want it!! And not for building the party but for their pet projects. It is time to start winning instead of fighting and power struggles.

Em said...

If evangelicals are losing, then they are losing on the issues. Not every evangelical holds the same on every issue (nor do they successfully promote those issues, otherwise they'd be elected).

Let's not forget that Obama himself uses religion when he feels like it will serve a purpose with a particular audience. Compare these two statements from Barak:
1. Made in South Carolina about prayer and doing the Lord's work: Fulfilling God's Will.
2. Made in San Fransicso about how folks cling to guns and religion.

Anonymous said...

Do the evangelicals have any money?
The moderates are the big political donors. What if they don't support the evangelical candidates with their money. Hmmm.

Mr. Joshua said...

Allow me to offer some casual observations as a longtime blog viewer, but frankly have been unable to post from work. When I'm at home I could post, but that is family time. So here goes.

This blog has replaced Krusty as the site with the most spirited debate primarily because you get visited by democratic staff and activist from what I can tell. I also wonder just how many of these anonymous posts are poobahs in the republican party either in an elected capacity or just rank and file hacks or handlers.

I don't live and breath political cat fights nor depend on a paycheck from those who do so I accept the possiblity that I could be wrong in my analysis of what needs to be done to right the ship known as my beloved republican party.

From my perspective Stu Iverson is the quintisential continuation of the Ray Hoffman era. The staff names change as the new breed of wet behind the ears college grads or dropouts bitten by the political bug take to the daily routine of trying to promote our values. Or do they?

I'm a republcian voter that is driven by our core principles and try amongst my coworkers, family and friends to convey a message that holds true to what being a republican means. But I don't see any message of that kind coming from the state party. Maybe they are sending out press releases to that end, but its not trickling down to those of us on the ground.

I read about the lagging fundraising at the party and the overhead to unsuccessfully raise money and have to wonder, Can we do better?

Well in short, I don't know. What I do know is that we certainly cannot do any worse. So my feeling is that if you are one of the pioneers of the state republican party that has been around since the glory days of 1982 and you still work in politics during the steady decline of all that we hold dear as a party, please step aside.

Ted Sporer is certainly a lighting rod from the word go, but isn't that what we need right now? Mr. Sporer or TRS has more than earned an opporunity to try things his way and if he fails, well then we have the status quo. Nothing lost. In the meantime, he may just succeed and wouldn't that be a nice change of pace for our party and our ideals?

My gut says go with Sporer and throw the deep ball down the sideline to paydirt.

Anonymous said...

TRS is a no win situation for the party. The moderates have the money and want nothing to do with the likes of Ted.

Mr. Joshua said...

By "the moderates" do you mean the likes of Kim Schmett and that heavy set old guy that raises money for the party? At the risk of sounding glib, who cares? What have they done for the good of the party this decade?

RF said...

Mr. Joshua,

Since you appear to be a principled true grassroots Republican, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on R politicians' fixation on everything anti-gay? Is that an important issue for you?

I'm really just asking, trying to understand how the folks on your side of the fence think.

Mr. Joshua said...


I think much of what you and others consider "anti-gay" is viewed by our side of the isle as preserving traditional family values. Hear me out on this. We feel that the institution of the family is that where every child has a mom and a dad. Gay marriage doesn't get me all bent out of shape, but it does most republicans because it then leads to gay adoption. Now we have a problem. We are back to the every child deserves a mom and a dad thing.

While to the gay community it seems as though we want to deny them them the right to love and marry the person of their choosing, we maintain that every man has the right to marry any woman and any woman has the right to marry any man. We aren't creating any special rights for anyone and clearly frown on attempts to create special rights for others.

Do some in our party hate gays? Yes and they are typically uneducated baffoons, but the good news is they are in a VERY small minority in our party (see the part in the Bible about that God loves everyone thing) Besides, when was the last time a gay person had an abortion? Exactly.

I hope this answers your question.

RF said...

Mr. Joshua,

Yes, you definitely answered my question. Thanks for taking the time to do that. I appreciate your nonhysterical, rational approach to the issue. While we disagree on the topic, I do my best to respect differing moral views.

Speaking of abortion, I have long argued that we D's should have more understanding and compassion for pro-life views and people in our party. I'm pro-choice myself, but I fully understand the difficult moral call on the issue. As long as people keep having babies and the ultrasound pics keep getting better, I suspect militant pro-choice folks are on the losing side of that battle.

Mr. Joshua said...


Very well said. I completely agree that technology is doing more for the pro-life movement than those whackjobs who drive around in vans with billboards of aborted fetus' on them.

They make me seriously consider becoming and independent sometimes, but then I remember that they aren't republicans but rather just whackjobs.

Anonymous said...

So does Mr. Joshua think we should take away kids from single parent families? Is it better for a child to be raised by two men or two women than by one divorced mom?

Anonymous said...

When it comes to the gay-marriage issue how come safety never comes up?

Did you know that that homosexual couples are 35 times more likely to abuse their "spouse"?

How about the indifferent opinion that having sex with children is not wrong?

Also have you seen the murder rate between homosexual couples versus heteralsexual couples?

When you look at these numbers then you have a completely new reason that we need to do something about homosexual couples!

Anonymous said...

You going to cite a reference for those stats or are you just pulling them out of your ass?

Mr. Joshua said...


Anon 11:58 is a classic example of the idiots that do far more harm to our side of the debate. Pay no attention to the unattended child at the computer.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:58 is the picture boy of the religious right to most of the independents. Marching in lock step with Steve Deace to the destruction of the party.

RF said...

Agreed. Nutcases on your side never help your cause.