Rudy gets it!

Every once in a great while we encounter politicians who grasp not only the governing and decisive issue of the times but the possess the ability to define it, focus on it and persuade people to change their minds about it. We call that behavior leadership.

The Democrat MoveOn.org New York Times ad attacking General David Petraeus, near unanimously confirmed by the Senate only months ago, and the echo chamber in the Democrat Congressional Caucuses provides what drunks call a moment of clarity for our society. America is presented with the true face of the modern American liberal and her addiction to despair and defeat.

Hillary Clinton’s employment of the Coleridge idiom-“willing suspension of disbelief” for fiction to describe General Petraeus’ optimistic report on Iraq provides crystalline clarity to so much of what is wrong and dangerous about the American self-loathing left. Rather than confront the reality that, despite the American left’s own best efforts to conform American policy to Iranian and Jihadi objectives, the United States and our allies both must and are prevailing in the Iraqi theater, the American left attacks the messengers of good news, like Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker.

It is frustrating that the lefties cannot answer factual, historical and contextual arguments with anything deeper than a tag line like “there must be a political solution” or a recitation of the latest body count. Now, as factual reality again intrudes unpleasant success in the Democrats’ ceaseless veil of despair they resort to the disgraceful attack on the heroes in the field, abandoning even the disingenuous “we support the troops” slogan of the past six years in a pall mall race back to the hate filled days of the Vietnam War.

Most Americans do not share the left’s nostalgia for Vietnam. Most Americans understand the lasting damage that flight from Vietnam did to their nation, you know, the United States. Most Americans now understand how truly the American left and their media fronts like Walter Cronkite distorted the conditions on the ground to create the impression of defeat from the reality of victory in Vietnam. It’s our Republican duty to ensure comprehesive public appreciation of the national need and ability to win in Iraq.

Simply put, most Americans want to win. For whatever reason, the Administration has done a poor job of staying on top of the story. I think the President thought that his reelection meant an end to politics. The President has ignored the relentless erosion of public support for the Iraqi theater by the left’s distortion of the context and reality in Iraq. Worst of all, for far, far too long Republicans have been intimidated by the Democrats’ increasingly ugly and irrational pursuit of domestic political victory at the cost of devastating national defeat. Most Republicans have forgotten that leadership tells people what they don’t necessarily want to hear and persuades them to do what they don’t necessarily want to do.

Rudy gets it, however, and he has fired back. The new Giuliani web ad is great, smacking the leftist icon Evita with a direct attack on the content and context of the mainstream liberal endorsement of this deceptive, radical and self-loathing isolationism.

Best of all, Evita’s response is a grotesque of leadership. Her reply is merely a statement that the unpopularity of the war justifies deception, distortion and defamation to gratify a popular but self-destructive public desire for flight from the ceaselessly televised, ugly carnage of war. Such thinking bespeaks the feckless leadership of the Carter and Clinton Administrations that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Usama bin Laden now cite as proof of the Jihads’s inevitable victory and the United States’ inevitable retreat from the Middle East. Such a result would leave Israel in the genocidal clutches of the Islamofascist jihad and the Western economies in a depression that makes the 30’s look like the 80s.

But then again, Rudy does know something about confronting a wise guy.

Sunday Talk Review-Meet the Press (NBC)-Russert hits new low, looks shameful and silly.

On a personal note, although obviously a Democrat and a former staffer for New York Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, I always kind of liked and respected Tim Russert. The Iraq campaign has apparently caused Russert to return to the Baby Boom days of yore, in which he (and every other leftist born between ‘46 and ‘55) personally ended the Vietnam War and saved the world from Richard Nixon. The imminence of geriatric irrelevance is upon this group of people and so they have mindlessly seized resistance to American involvement in Iraq as the nostalgic path to renewed significance.

So this morning, Russet and the now most openly partisan network, NBC, drug Meet the Press into a new low in their pursuit of defeat in Iraq. The headlines screamed quotes from the Iraqi Security Forces Independent Assessment Commission that created the appearance of defeat in Iraq, and emphasized the length of time that the US will be involved in Iraq.

Russert’s first two guests were General James Jones, USMC (Ret.) Chairman, Iraqi Security Forces Independent Assessment Commission Former Supreme Allied Commander, Europe and 32nd Commandant of the United States Marine Corps and Chief Charles Ramsey Member, Iraqi Security Forces Independent Assessment Commission, former Chief of the Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, D.C.(whose forces captured the D.C. sniper).

Emoting the greatest of concern and emphasizing every negative implication, Russert repeatedly asked questions designed to evidence defeat in Iraq. Neither Gen. Jones nor Chief Ramsey fell for it. Russert asked if we would still be in Iraq in 18 months, Jones replied that we were still in Bosnia so the length of time it takes to solve the problem is not the dispositive issue. Russert asked about the findings that the Iraq military cannot act on its own, and apparently will not have that capacity for some time. Jones replied that the question is one of mission. Will Iraq’s military be able to protect the country from external threats (Iran) in the next couple of years? No. Will they be able to maintain internal control from the Shia militias and Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, probably yes.

Russert directed the same type of context distorting inquiry to Chief Ramsey. Obviously the Iraqi police need improvement as does Iraqi public confidence in the police, as Ramsey recognized, but improvements in both have occurred and will continue to occur, as Ramsey also explained. Both Gen. Jones and Chief Ramsey made Tim look like a political hack, spinning tales of American defeat when surrounded by evidence of American victory. Bagdad Bob must have had a workshop at NBC.

Joe Biden appeared during the second session. Tim provided Joe with little more than a forum in which to advance the argument that Iraq is no more secure now than six months ago. Joe’s evidence for the defeatist conclusion is, of course, that the existence of some places in Iraq that are unsafe to ground travel for a visiting dignitary means that the cause is lost. Unlike most Dems, Joe at least goes into some of hot spots in Iraq so that he can report first hand.

Joe spent some time discussing the need for new and better-armored infantry fighting vehicles. While I think Joe is sincere on this one, I wonder how he reconciles the lack of such weaponry with his, and that of almost every other Democrat, votes to substantially reduce weapons procurement throughout the 90s. Don’t you?

Biden continues to demonstrate a grasp of the real world implications of leaving Iraq without victory (that means minimal Al Qaeda and Iranian influence because the government can support itself, defend itself and maintain territorial security) that substantially exceeds that of any other Democrat. Joe’s lack of support in the Democrat primary tells you just how out of touch with the dangers facing the American people the party of appeasement has become.

Sunday Fox News Sunday-(Fox)-Feinstein takes flight, Frannie keeps it real.

Chris Wallace hosted Sen. Diane Feinstein (D San Francisco) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R S.C.) this morning. Feinstein opened with the latest Democrat shift in their canard based demand for defeat in Iraq. Starting with the premise, there is no purely military solution and a political solution is necessary for victory, she quickly moved on to the Democrats’ latest attack line-the lack of national level political process is evidence of inevitable defeat

To digress for a moment, the childish repetition of the tag line “no victory without a political solution” does nothing more than state the obvious. Perhaps the most insightful philosopher of military theory, von Clausewitz, long ago opined that war is a continuation of politics by other means, and every person now formulating Administration policy knows that. What the Democrats ignore is the other premise of victory, military success and control. If one’s enemies are still in the field fighting with a chance of victory, defined by them as US retreat from Iraq, then a political solution is not possible because the cost of the political solution outweighs its benefit. Feinstein simply flees from confrontation with the logical corollary of her argument.

Lindsey hammered out the evidence that we are crushing Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, and the consequences of defeat, (victory for Al Qaeda and expansion of Iranian power). Feinstein promptly acknowledged the military progress and then retreated to a criticism of the al Maliki government. Feinstein, like most of the sane but merely disingenuous Democrats, simply ignores any discussion of the cost of retreat. They know it would be catastrophic for the country but good for them and, well, we know where that story ends.

Wallace quoted or played clips of Dingy Harry Reid and Tricky Dick Durbin, the essentially treasonous Democrat Senate leadership, already saying that Gen. Petraeus and Amb. Crocker will lie when they describe improvement in Iraq. Feinstein certainly tried to distance herself from those two and their campaign of slime. In the end, Feinstein acknowledged that the Democrats will not be able to implement their demand for a surrender date in Iraq. History chalks up another victory for W in the real world-which explains a lot about why the liberals hate him.

Presidential Homeland Security Advisor Frances Townsend stopped by to apply a little Real World to the Democrat claims that the either the War on Terror doesn’t exist (Edwards and the nuttier left) or that we are losing (Clinton, Obama and the merely dangerous left). I find it odd that so few Republicans take the time to itemize the major terror attacks against US facilities that historically occurred about every two years during the two Presidential terms (eight years) before 9.11, but Frannie certainly did not hesitate to remind the viewers of what hasn’t happened since.

Chris pushed hard on Townsend to describe actual operations, which she wisely avoided providing. Townsend did focus on the frequent successes in disrupting terror cells and incipient attacks. Townsend failed to use the very great line-we haven’t had all these successes by accident-but she still drew the political bright line-Democrats want to diminish the tools that have disrupted the plots, lead to the capture of terrorists, and saved thousands of American lives.

You have to wonder whose family the Democrats are willing to sacrifice in pursuit of domestic political power through the venal subversion of public morale and national unity in this long and most difficult War on Terror.

Republican Debate Review.........Huck, Rudy and John

The fourth debate is in the books. Tonight presented a far better format, with far more intramural clash, than in any of the predecessor events. Huckabee stole the show tonight, with Rudy close on his heals and McCain rebounding hard. I still don’t know why we have moderators at all. Shouldn’t someone who wants to be President of the United States be able to stand his ground on a stage with his competitors without any direction or editing?

As usual. we’re going to rate each debater on a scale of 1-30. The ratings are based in part on presentation, part on content and part on the stage management of the occasion. In alphabetical order:

Sam Brownback Sam seemed very off his game tonight. Sam started the debate series with a great performance in the first debate but has consistently been kind of a wall flower in the last three debates. Sam had a couple of great answers but was unable to produce a dominant posture on even his strongest answers about family and homosexual marriage; while again tremendously articulate he didn’t generate a powerful presence. Sam is a complex legal thinker but he has not demonstrated the ability to exploit the debate format.

1st debate/25

2nd debate/21

3rd debate/22

4th debate/20

Rudy Giuliani. Rudy was great tonight. His answers are almost entirely direct. He minimized damage on his weaknesses-like his utterly chaotic family life-by giving the smart argument. Rudy repeatedly targeted the Democrats and, more importantly, seemed like a tough and competent, if somewhat strangely idiosyncratic, leader. His shot at Fred was great to start. His answer on Guantanamo was also killer, fact based, much like a President in the making telling people what they need but wish not to hear. Giuliani always comes back to competence and measurable results; two very reassuring traits to the average voter.

1st debate/21

2nd debate/27

3rd debate/27

4th debate/28

Mike Huckabee. Huck just keeps getting better. Tonight he really started to step out from behind the “social conservative” template. While Ron Paul is an easy target, Huck’s smack down made him look tough-and a lack of toughness was one of the worst knocks on Huck. He defended the Fair Tax well and talked tough on foreign policy. He also showed the ability to dodge questions and stay on message without seeming to have just ducked the question entirely.

1st debate/25

2nd debate/27

3rd debate/28

4th debate/29

Duncan Hunter. He smiled broadly for the first time. Keep it up Duncan-it looks good. I have said it before-Duncan Hunter just seems like he should be the Commander in Chief. I almost completely agree with every word he utters. He also showed a very clear vision for the world tonight. Unfortunately, he has the reverse problem from Sam and, previously, Huck-he only gets foreign policy questions. Let’s be honest-you just know that he would blow those Iranian monsters back into the stone age!

1st debate/23

2nd debate/24

3rd debate/25

4th debate/27

John McCain. Sen. McCain started out slow, old and over rehearsed; getting to speak last on his own ground allowed him to end passionate, serious and wise. John’s somewhat undeserved slap down on Mitt over the word “apparent” made Sen. McCain look resolute and committed. He is the only guy other than Tancredo who really talks about the big war and the need for strength, and the consequences of appearing weak. The Senator’s answer on taxes reminded me of his opposition of the President’s tax cuts-back when he was running for the Non-Party Party nomination. Actually, it reminded me of the personal nature of his fights with W. None the less, a huge debate improvement for the Senator tonight, both on style and substance.

1st debate/23

2nd debate/24

3rd debate/ 24

4th debate/ 27

Ron Paul. How maddening. The libertarian in me screams yes on so much of what he says. Then the pragmatist returns to the real world. Rudy pounded at him in the first debate, Huck used him as foil with brilliance tonight. You never want the most memorable moment of one on these things to be on the other guy’s highlight film. But he was more theatrical (compliment), and he made better arguments for his sometimes simply unsupportable positions than he has in the past events.

1st debate/21

2nd debate/20

3rd debate/21

4th debate/26

Mitt Romney. This was Mitt’s weakest outing, mostly because he was the target tonight. His answers seemed nuanced far too often, which just feeds the flip-flop image. When you’re one of the clear front runners, a status I believe Mitt now occupies, even a little mistake like using the word “apparent” to describe the Surge’s success can be exploited. Much attention was paid to Mitt’s issue evolution and his defenses seemed somewhat, insincere. Mitt remained calm and didn’t get rattled. He does handle the misstatement about his boys’ service quite well, it was a misstatement that just did not come out right. Isn’t it time to give the guy a break and move off this non issue?

1st debate/25

2nd debate/24

3rd debate/27

4th debate/ 24

Tom Tancredo. He is just so sincere and real. The Tanc had the tonic but lacked stage presence. His response on Iraq was somewhat incoherent. However, the Tanc’s attack on global jihad and the extent to which we are being suicidal with this political correctness were, as usual, great.

1st debate/21

2nd debate/22

3rd debate/24

4th debate/ 23

The ratings neither reflect my personal support for a candidate nor a belief as to the ultimate nominee. We have a very long way to go before that issue is decided and, of course, the nominee might not even have been on the stage.

Debate coverage and live blogging, Rocky Mountain Style

The Real Sporer has been invited to participate as a panelist for Denver’s Rocky Mountain Times “Back Roads to the White House Blog” tonight. I can’t wait, and it should be fun.

We will have our usual post debate analysis, complete with speaker points, later tonight.

I have returned.

After being driven from the internet for a couple of weeks by technology and chronology, I came through and the Real Sporer is back, and we’re better than ever baby.

We have missed a lot over the last few weeks. The surge is working, the rebellion is in the process of being crushed and the networks have gone silent on Iraq. Headline coverage of American casualties remains the only real Iraq coverage in the MSM.

The economy maintained full employment, real wages grew and the Dow has remained over 13,000. Our last recession began during the last quarter of the Clinton Administration, not last week as the MSM portrayed.

Fred Thompson is growing closer to becoming a candidate. John Edwards is growing closer to becoming a footnote in American history, and seven-point footnote at that.

Michael Vick pled guilty and the usual race baiters claimed that the prosecution was race based. After all, they argue, dog fighting is part of black culture and should, therefore, be placed in proper context, which apparently means excused. Although I doubt that premise to be true, if so, so what? Genital mutilation is part of some cultures but we don’t tolerate that cultural norm here either. Michael Vick is getting off easy and should have to face the dogs, or lions and tigers and bears if he bests the dogs.

Larry Craig’s apparently very wide stance in the bathroom caused him to plead guilty and then resign, and then withdraw his guilty plea and his resignation. Senator, stick with the guilty plea and ride off into a lucrative sunset. Anyone who pleads guilty to committing an illegal homosexual act in a public place when they are, in fact, not guilty of anything more than a “wide stance” simply lacks the intelligence to be a United States Senator.

Those crazy Clinton kids are raising money from Chinese mobsters again. Since Norman Hsu jumped bail a second time today we can probably assume that he must be hanging out with the 120 or so other Chinese mobsters that fled the United States the last time the Clintons got caught selling basing rights to the ChiComs for campaign cash. Where is a brother going to find a Buddhist monk when he needs absolution?

Al Gonzalez jumped off the bandwagon amidst Democrat screeches that he was the most political AG since Watergate. Strange, I would have thought that title would go to Janet Reno, the only Attorney General of the United States who actually litigated against the United States, a legal irony in which Janet Reno routinely engaged on behalf of Bill Clinton. My favorite Renoism isn’t the 120 or so Chinese mobsters whom she allowed to escape the United States but rather her attempts to prevent federal law enforcement officers from testifying about the criminal acts they witnessed Bill Clinton commit.

Best of all, football has returned to the heartland with a bang. How often do Michigan, Notre Dame and ISU all lose and the Hawks (and we all know what you are if you are not a Hawk) and Bulldogs win on the same day?

Newt’s Genius

Love him or hate him, you have to admit Newt Gingrich is a genius. Newt has spent the last week recommending the increasingly politically passive White House to take a bold political step to implement a badly need public policy.

Newt wants W to exercise his Constitutional powers to call Congress back into session to pass a single immigration bill. The legislative agenda would simply require all local law enforcement officials to check the immigration status of anyone charged with a felony in the United States. The Real Sporer would suggest enforcement by simply denying any federal funds for anything going to any jurisdiction that is found to have willfully failed to comply with the federal legislation.

The political impact would be tremendous. Democrat open border advocates like Pelosi/Reid/Kennedy and the increasingly lunatic Russ Feingold would be backed into a corner. The Dem’s complaints about the Iraqi Parliament taking a thirty day vacation would appear even more shallow (if one can find less depth than Dem leadership has heretofore displayed) if the Dem leadership complained about returning from vacation. The President would appear large and in charge, responding to a current flash point with an incredibly popular solution. Few would say the White House couldn’t use a popular crusade right about now.

Come one Mr. President-you can do it!

Fred

Fred Thompson made his first visit to Des Moines earlier today. We were lucky enough to participate in a limited admission Q&A with Fred earlier today.

At the outset, I must confess, it is quite tempting for me to say “I’m with Fred” because I’ve pretty much been with a Fred my entire life. My Dad’s name is Fred(erick) and my middle name is Fred(erick)-yes, I am a “Teddy Freddy”, which explains my pugnacious nature-so I will have to make a concerted effort to avoid identifying with a lawyer named Fred.

Thompson is studiedly subtle and disarming. His resume and life story provide an interesting road to the White House. Hardly a legacy Fred, as bespeaks his name, is a bootstraps kind of guy who has achieved much on merit alone for around 35 years in public life.

It appears that Fred is in the opening stages of the “get to know ya” part of the campaign. His themes remain philosophical and general. Three dominant goals appear: rebuild the military so as to win a long war with global terror; reenergize the economy with tax cuts and regulatory relief; and, federalize solutions to social problems. The philosophical one iron allows Thompson to target dead center on the Republican ideological fairway. It also echoes the simple and irresistible appeal of Ronald Reagan’s surprising landslide against Jimmy Carter, which is not to say Fred is Dutch, of course. When Fred discussed solutions with any specificity he tended to focus on the common sense aspect of problem solving.

Specific bytes of evidence emerged over the course of about forty five minutes with Fred this morning. Eight Army divisions are clearly not enough; three percent of GDP on defense is insufficient; our corporate tax rates are higher than Scandinavian rates, creating a difficult problem for American goods in the international markets are three such examples. Such an approach leaves the listener believing that every point is supported by fact without boring through excess detail. Is a tough balance and Fred appeared able to pull it off.

Ag Secretary Bill Northey led an impressive turnout of Party officials and legislators at the event. The Republican leadership present provided a broad cross section of the Party, also serving evidence that the larger body of Republicans remain uncommitted to any one of the contenders. No one with whom I spoke came away unimpressed so the field is still open to a Thompson candidacy.

Fred promised many more trips to Iowa in the near future so hopefully more people can have a chance to view the late comer to the Hawkeye state. All of us Iowans have a lot of responsibility on our shoulders this year so everyone who plans to attend their caucus should get out and see the contenders in person; they are typically different in person than they are on television.

Straw Poll-Continuing Impact

Two stories about the Straw Poll’s continuing impact are beginning to float through the Ethernet tonight.

The first is pretty obvious; Mike Huckabee’s second place finish has produced a lot of media this week. The combination of good news and increased exposure has supposedly significantly boosted the Razorback’s fundraising. Since Huckabee got more votes than the quantity of tickets he purchased you’d have to say the event gave him a pretty big bang for the buck.

The second is somewhat murkier. Rumor has it that a second GOP participant at the Ames Straw Poll is set to drop out in the next few days. We’ll be chasing this rumor down hard, if it’s groundless we’ll say so, if not the fallout zone will broaden beyond Wisconsin.

With Fred D. Thompson making his Iowa debut tomorrow it looks like the Real Sporer has his work cut out.

Hoisted on their own petard.

Dingy Harry Reid is so afraid of the good news coming from Iraq in September that he is already, however clumsily, trying to discredit the report before it arrives.

Reid floated a completely groundless rumor that the September progress report on Iraq that the Post Office Congress of Damascus Nancy and Dingy Harry demanded was going to be a political document written only in the White House.

Aside from the legal requirement, upon which Reid personally insisted in including in the May legislation, that the report must come from the President, there was never any intention for either General Petraeus or Ambassador Crocker to testify in closed session, much less exclude them from the creative process of actually writing the report. Not surprisingly, Reid's statements were based on anonymous sources. How utterly convenient.

Maybe the 14% Congress has finally overreached. Defeat at any price is not really the American way. While it did take two and a half years to return to the American principle of victory through overwhelming force, the Bush Administration finally got it right and began overwhelming with force in Iraq. Open minded Democrats have already conceded the existence of substantial military and security progress. Today, the Iraqi government took a significant step toward political reconciliation with the Kurdish parties returning to the government. Reid’s desperation to promote defeat is palpable. Quisling is far too kind of a word for Reid.

Moreover, rumors abound that the Ed Gillespie lead White House political operation is planning a massive counterattack this September, much like the spine breaker they put on John Kerry in September of 2004. Maybe the White House will wake up and begin applying the overwhelming rhetorical and political force at its disposal to crush venally ambitious and dangerously weak liberal politics of division, distortion, despair and defeat.

Rudy does the Fair…………

…………….. and brother did he generate enthusiasm. A large crowd gathered around Rudy from the moment he arrived at the main Grand Avenue gate.

People shouted out things like “There’s Rudy Giuliani” from all angles as Giuliani walked around the Fairgrounds for several hours. Rudy took impromptu questions from the crowd at all of his stops. The Giuliani leadership mystique was on full display in his typically well-reasoned answers.

One thing that differentiates Giuliani from almost every other politician in America is his willingness to explain to people why they should agree with him instead of why he agrees with them. Giuliani has mastered the too rare practice of persuasive argument. Rudy fielded the usual questions on Iraq and immigration with his usual very hard lines. Rudy has added a smart argument for improving the immigration bureauacracy to expedite and organize the flow of legal migrant labor since the last time I heard him in any detail on the topic of immigration. Refreshingly, America’s Mayor also straight up answered more unusual queries about things like privatizing public services.

Rudy also focuses much attention on fiscal issues-and again presents a very conservative agenda of Reaganesque tax and regulatory relief. Rudy talked about his record of executive experience at almost every stop as well.

Most to my liking, Rudy takes the fight hard to the Democrats on every topic. He is not abashed in any position that he asserts, which is also refreshing even when disagreeing with Giuliani. It is far easier to gage that actions of someone with whom one disagrees if the disagreement is open and honest. Giuliani draws bright lines for the voters.

Rudy appeared unshaken by everything but the heat. His high-energy personality and the New Guinea like humidity seemed to be boiling the poor guy but otherwise a very Presidential performance today for America’s Mayor here at the great State Fair (don’t miss it, don’t even be late). No wonder the media has begun exploiting the Giuliani family, they are very, very afraid.

Big News, New Polls

The Ames Straw Poll is history and so is the immediate aftermath. Mitt looked solid, Huck surprised and Tommy threw in the towel.

That means it is time for a reset of the Presidential preference poll. We are down to ten contestants.

It also is time to start seriously thinking about a winning ticket. With Tommy Thompson out as POTUS he still makes an intriguing VP for a number of our potential nominees. I’ve already had about a half dozen people ask my opinion on Rudy & Huck as a combination. Clearly, choices require discussion so let’s get to it.

Whose your Dream Team and why?

Edwards: Inelegant and mean.

Karl Rove appears headed into the sunset, depriving Democrats of a favorite target, and some just are not content to see him go.

First, let us define the terms of debate. The Farlex Free Dictionary defines “inelegant” as “lacking refinement or polish; not elegant”. The same source defines “mean” as “cruel, spiteful, or malicious … ignoble; base.”

John Kerry is usually hard to top in the vicious invective department and today he certainly gets a Red Ribbon for second place with this example of sepulcherine urination.

"It's a tragedy that an administration that promised to unite Americans has instead left us more divided than ever before. Without doubt the architect of that political strategy was Karl Rove, who proved the politics of division may win some elections but cannot govern America”.

Yes, John F. Kerry certainly displayed a lack of refinement and baseness at an elegiac moment by the statements at the end of a rival’s career. However, Kerry seemed like Amy Vanderbilt compared to the pettiness displayed by John Edwards.

"Goodbye, good riddance."

I’m looking for the video because the mere words hardly do justice to the animus of heart that clearly motivated Edwards absurdly boorish remark. Moreover, the look on Edward’s face and the tone of his voice are quite literally the visage of hatred typically found on a face even more Aryan than Edwards.

Ugly usually has a pretty face, or so my old granny used to say.

Straw Poll Impact-Huckabee Headlines Hannity & Colmes Monday Night.

For those who say that the Ames Straw Poll had no impact, Mike Huckabee is the headliner tonight on Hannity & Colmes. Huck would not have enjoyed the H&C audience of millions tonight had he not surged into second in Ames on Saturday night. H&C is just the start of a busy week. That is what I meant by momentum

I’m also told that they have received a large infusion of volunteer names in the last day and a half over at Little Rock North.

Sunday Talk Review: Meet the Press (NBC)-Gregory challenges the Fairness Doctrine

Left wing media icon David Gregory was the guest host today. Gregory took the opportunity to present almost 60 minutes of D propaganda this morning. Where does this kind of programming square with Fairness Doctrine? The two guests were Harold Ford, Jr. and Markos Moulitsas, founder of the Daily Kos hate machine.

Harold Ford, Jr. was the spokesman for the “moderate” DLC wing of the Democrat Party. Ford said the Democrats must clear three ideological hurdles to win the White House: National security; Show mainstream social values; display credibility on taxes and spending. Ford concluded that too much enthusiasm for their liberal agenda would produce a missed opportunity because the public has rejected Republicans and are clamoring for more government. Moulitsas said that liberals had to be more proud of being liberal and the agenda needed pushed.

Gregory asked for policy details. Moulitsas again failed to become even superficially specific. The Daily Kos top three policies are for the candidates to be authentic, to tell the voters “who [they] are” and to progressive. Yes that was the real answer, no discussion of any issues what so ever.

Ford listed three issues, in order a clean energy future with new investments; to fight growing inequality; and to address healthcare and education challenges. No mention of winning the war on terror but Ford did at least identify policy issues. Interestingly, nothing about Ford’s priorities would have more than a tangential relationship with the first two hurdles Dems must clear to win.

Gregory actually pushed Moulitsas for some details and Moulitsas responded with the liberal politicization of the Minneapolis bridge collapse. This was the usual liberal gibberish that the tax cuts, which have produced record federal revenues through growth, prevented bridge repair, etc… Moulitsas described crises in the making with collapsing bridges all over the country. Dems were saying the same thing in 84 and there has been one bridge collapse since then, 23 years later.

Neither Ford nor Moulitsas could provide anything like fact based reasons for adopting their positions. Like most Democrats, they described problems, elucidated conspiracies, attacked Republicans but never described a solution or a reason to believe the solution might “solve” the problem. That’s one symptom of the madness of political correctness that Tom Tancredo described in Ames.

Moulitsas did unleash some venom at Hillary, pointing out the obvious that she has clung to Bill’s coat since marriage and has no significant achievement of her own that would qualify her for the Presidency. Moulitsas makes it clear that real liberals view the Clinton Presidency as a failure.

Then the panel, and what a panel it was. There was a conservative writer, Byron York, while Chuck Todd, who sounds like a Harold Ford kind of Democrat, joined Gregory, Margaret Carlson and Michael Duffy as the three hard core Democrat propagandists in the attacks on Republicans. Todd and York observed that Romney is looking stronger in our field. Todd described Romney was fighting hard” on his right. Todd, felt the big winner was Mike Huckabee, who gains attention and momentum from the straw poll, giving him a right to demand inclusion in the top flight of candidates.

Literally the rest of the panel time was devoted to discussing Republican spiritual woes. Gregory, Todd, Carlson and Duffy were predictably advancing Democrat spin; Republicans are dispirited, cannot get away from the Bush “undertow”; Fred will be a bad candidate, etc….. It is strange how the song never changes. Margret Carlson said the same things in the days leading up to the Reagan 49 state sweep in 1984 and ebulliently guaranteed Democrat victory in 1988 based on the same factors, included national Republican fatigue.

Carlson is among the best of examples of the 21st Century Democrats’ worst problem. Dems and their media allies can create dissatisfaction by constant attacks on public morale, but almost no one wants higher taxes or a health care system run by IRS like bureaucrats. Needless to say, the American voting public isn’t all that keen on dying in a terror attack either. The public usually rejects the dangerous, when not entirely lacking, solutions Ds propose to the problems about which Dems complain . Voters want solutions that have a chance to work. That’s why Dems don’t do much winning anymore, and why 2008 has a chance to put them in the same whole as did 1988.

I should have turned over to PGA coverage an hour earlier. Gregory wasted air time this morning.

Sunday Talk Review: Fox News Sunday-Wallace v. Romney.

Host Chris Wallace came out swinging with Mitt Romney this morning. Mitt looked vibrant, alert and powerful. His voice sounded tired-not surprising after the yesterday’s marathon talking.

Chris focused on questions about the diminished victory without Giuliani in the straw poll and the smaller turnout. Mitt gave the two strongest and best responses possible. First, the Straw Poll is a test run for the Caucuses. Like a good businessman, Mitt argues that the Caucuses require organization and the message and both should be tested before the Caucuses. If you can turn out thousands of people months before the first vote it’s a sign that message and organization are working.

Second, Mitt argues that Rudy and McCain dropped Iowa out of weakness and not strength. Mitt thinks that yesterday’s victory is also a sign that he can win the big one in November. The Mitt theory is that Iowa is a purple state. If Republicans can’t win here we probably cannot win the presidency so building in Iowa early is also a good general election plan. Planning like that is on target and bespeaks good strategic insight, another attractive attribute in a Presidential nominee.

Wallace asked about the compressed schedule and its uncertain affect on Romney’s plan to build momentum during the campaign following wins in Iowa and New Hampshire. Romney advanced the theory that he would be helped by the compressed schedule, although its hard to say how it will play out. Mitt seems to think that he would have a significant advantage of controlling the message.

Romney defended his record-talking about what he has done and not just what he wants to do. Mitt’s explanation of his transition to a pro-life policy ideology was is as compelling as it g ets. The analogy to Reagan as transitioning to a pro-life position once he had to actually confront action that counted, throwing in George HW and Henry Hyde as examples of other Republicans who made the same journey. Wallace continued on the abortion issue for several questions, pressing Mitt hard. Romney held up well and concluded that the other campaigns that attacked him missed the mark because Iowans on a hot day accepted his message. More importantly, Mitt appears to believe that the issue has hit the high-water mark and people have already either accepted or rejected him over it.

Chris floated the usual questions about how Mitt would differ from W. Mitt said that he would bring in a real good team from different backgrounds. Mitt sounded like he was approaching the “C” word (“culture”) to describe the nature of our current global conflict. Mitt want to change Islamic culture through a non-military focus on bringing Islamic nations to modernity (which most reject). Mitt was still very short on details, however. Mitt talks enough about a tough military approach that I think the persuasion might be delivered by Boeing and General Electric.

Wallace pounced on population and economic statistics. It appears that the macro numbers weren’t good for the Bay State during Mitt’s tenure. Mitt’s response was that he inherited a basket case and left 238 companies moving into Massachusetts. Only time will tell on this defense. God knows that the liberals are doing to Massachusetts what they want to do to the entire nation and if Mitt could even change the trend a true miracle would have occurred in Massachusetts.

The panel discussion featured Mike Glover, Carl Cameron and Michael Barone (with whom I had a good talk yesterday-smart and funny guy to be sure) as the special panel (like the Warren Report panel). Barone also talked about the reduced attendance. Glover echoed Romney that the end of the Clinton years drove a higher turnout in Ames eight years ago. However, Glover went much too far in claiming that there is an “angst” in the Republican Party. Such a statement was grossly inconsistent with the crowd Mike witnessed yesterday-this is what I mean by “media bias”.

Carl Cameron also placed the Straw Poll in a true statistical light. Since 4,000 people turning out-more than 10% of the total Caucus turnout so is a massive event. Moreover, I think it was Cameron who described the affect the rules changes had on turnout.

Carl said Romney might be hurt by the compressed schedule and Romney helped because the news in the first four weeks could shift attention from Giuliani in the big states where he has a big advantage now. Glover was on point by describing Romney strategy as the “old” primary strategy (win early, build Big Mo) and Giuliani’s as new (survive early/win big states later). Barone wouldn’t say which approach was better, saying it was an “open question”. Barone reasoned that Rs are more fluid this time out its too hard to even predict in August.

Barone concluded that Huckabee’s eloquence was coming into play and yesterday creates a new political day. Carl and Barone both opined that Evita is trying to humanize her image (no one really liked Madam Defarge and most voter’s think Hillary is even colder) and both said she was growing stronger in the primary. Glover stated the obvious, Edwards is a one state candidate at this point. Edwards has established personal relationships with Iowans but it is quite undetermined if he can overcome questions about his electability.

The second panel topic was the political crises for Democrats that their admissions that the Surge is working in Iraq. The current Democrat current whine is the obvious military success the US and our allies are experiencing in Iraq creates a bad general election posture come next year. What more could evidence the inherently antithetical relationship between most Democrat leadership and the concept of patriotism? For the Democrats, victory in Iraq would bring huge political repudiation at home and the Pelosi, Reid, Kerry and Harkin post office congress has chosen the catastrophe of national defeat for political victory. Barone agrees, at least in part, by citing the very bad problem a political party has when it is identified with defeat.

Cameron said Ds base is hard core anti-war and the candidates are pandering. Glover pointed the distinction as well, by showing he difference in Ds running for President and Ds running in only the general election in November.

Wipe off the smirks, Ds. We haven not yet egun to fight.

Sunday Talk Review: This Week (ABC)-Democrat take on the Straw Poll, part 1.

Sam Brownback opened the program. The Kansas Senator made it clear that his third place finish in yesterday’s Ames Straw Poll was sufficient to keep him going in the Presidential campaign. I agree. Brownback was the usual picture of calm and deliberation and the very slight disappointment of a narrow third place finish didn’t seem to rattle him at all.

George then asked Sam to distinguish himself from Mike Huckabee, holder of the Straw Poll red ribbon. Sam pointed to his chairmanship of the Mid-East subcommittee in the Senate and to greater foreign policy experience in general. This should telegraph a shift from focus on social to military/terror issues by Sam, a positive development for the general election.

Stephanopoulos opened the policy debate with a question about reinstituting the draft, a favorite red herring of the left. Of course Senator Sam was opposed the draft, a position shared by almost everyone else in public life on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue in D.C.

Sam joined the drumbeat against the Iraqi politicians’ inability to reach compromise on major issues (which always makes me laugh when coming from a member of the increasingly dysfunctional Congress). Sam would send Jim Baker to park in the region to pull people together with the three Iraqi groups (Shia, Kurd and Sunni) as a concrete new step he would make to help Iraq reach compromise internally. Brownback was willing to condition financial aid to Iraq on political process. Brownback feels that it is

No bail out of the sub prime lending market-a good Republican answer. The fundamentals of the economy make it clear that there is no crisis and there should not be a panic. Of course, the larger media Running Dogs will push panic, because a Republican lives at 1600 Pennsylvania. Brownback didn’t bite.

The funny if not so creepy Dennich Kucinich followed Sam. Kucinich is now talking about a “worker’s White House”, which sounds chillingly like Pol Pot or Mao taking about a worker’s paradise in their dictatorships. Kucinich says that the big cheers his lunacy bring in the D primary debates are evidence of his growing strength instead of proof that the D base has simply become lunatic itself.

George listed Kucinich’s left wing agenda and then read Harold Ford’s description of the Kucinich ultra-left positions and the damage that it could do to the Democrat Party. Kucinich’s response was a description that every other candidate in both parties is a right wing extremist. For example, Kucinich said that the DLC shares has a common political ideology with neo-conservatives like VP Cheney. The Gollem like figure now casts himself as the only centrist in the race.

George asked Dennis what incentive he though Iran would have to participate in productive negotiations that would advance American interests? Response, every country is concerned about stability. Kucinich then lapsed back into the usual liturgy about “peace through peace”, that has less depth than the Dr. Suess like lyrics he employs seem on their face, which is a pretty silly new low in political discourse.

Kucinich came out and acknowledged that he would abrogate the doctrine of nuclear deterrence, squarely blaming all global nuclear proliferation on the United States. A President Kucinich would create global non-proliferation through “multi-lateral” talks. Apparently that the same Iranians who have made Jewish genocide a significant part of Iranian policy would have a change in heart if Dennis Kucinich.

Kucinich couldn’t even commit to a military response if terrorists attack New York City. In fact, he went so far as to blame W (of course) for such an attack because we aren’t protecting our ports. Aside from the obvious lie-since no terror attacks have occurred in ports or elsewhere-W wasn’t President when the first World Trade Center bombing occurred. W’s vast super powers , like the super hurricane powers he unleashed on only black people in New Orleans are so frightening that the mere speculative possibility of his election seven and a half years later prompted that first WTC attack.

Kucinich was so radical this morning his appearance had to be a plant to make Evita look mainstream, and she is a real socialist elitist.

Then the panel. ABC’s George W echoed my conclusion about Romney’s win yesterday as moving Mitt closer to the binary choice Mitt wants with Rudy.
Donna focused on the lack of Republican enthusiasm-she should have been there. Will and Donna and the increasingly supercilious Fareed blamed reduced turn out on malaise rather than the rules changes that made it almost impossible to bus in supporters from outside Iowa.

ABC’s George W predicted that more attacks will come from the left, ‘cause Obama and Edwards need to “bring her down” which means tactics will be designed to “bring her down”. Donna said Evita will make no mistakes, as merely one of several advocacy statements Donna made for Evita this morning.

Will generated laughs on the pander award since Richardson told Iowans that we are a top ten terror target. No evidence supports that but it sure makes us feel special. I think I’ll stick with Mitt talking about our natural beauty and human wisdom to a high terror ranking as pander dialogue.

Fareed went straight to proposing that we eliminate primaries and use the European model of a three year general election. The argument leaves the basic question of how the political parties would choose their leaders for this marathon unanswered. Efficacy is the usual unspoken word in the dialogue of limousine liberals and Fareed saw no reason to speak it this morning.

One of the better ABC programs this morning.

Straw Poll: Second Thoughts-Winners and Losers.

Now that the dust is starting to settle, its time to give voice to the second impression of the Straw Poll.

As I said over at my Des Moines Register blog, the crowd enthusiasm was the most significant development coming out of the Straw Poll. I talked to hundreds of people today and everyone, except the tiny number of typical cranks and conspiracy theorists, was very enthusiastic and very optimistic about 2008. While nobody thinks victory is in the bag, it was good to hear such widespread agreement that Democrat victory isn’t inevitable either. The hangover is over.

Tom Tancredo is becoming progressively more admirable. His honesty is breathtaking for a politician. Politically correct thought and speech are killing our culture become it has become chic` to disregard factual reality in the interest of self-esteem (the speaker’s or others, it rarely matters). Tancredo’s description of immigration policy is the shared experience of most of the American population, not xenophobic racial animosity. His speech will play well over the next week and may lead to a little surge in the polls.

Mitt did a great job today. His organization did everything that people expected of the Collins-Kotchel crowd. They turned out the vote and had great stage management. I heard a replay of Mitt’s Hilton speech and it sounded much more policy oriented the second time around, which is a good thing from a rhetorical perspective. Mitt does seem almost perfect, also a good thing, regardless of what the more imperfect may think. While Mitt’s recent public affection for our state is surely at least somewhat contrived (‘cause we’re not that cool) it bespeaks good manners that he at least respects Iowa enough to be nice and good sense that he wants to campaign for every Republican vote. The on-ground impact is Mitt’s appearance as a national caliber party leader today and not the “mere” meeting of statistical expectations.

Tommy Thompson, one of the greatest governors in America’s history, suffered a bad loss today. His campaign never seemed to catch on, which is odd because he is a gregarious and charming guy. The poor early national TV appearances caused the Running Dogs to stereotype Tommy and he could not break out. Too bad, if there is anyone who is capable of creative thought its Tommy Thompson.

By his absence, Rudy Giuliani was the biggest loser. As I have said in the press, McCain’s absence was an operational assumption because of his history of disregard for Iowa’s brand of retail politics, but Rudy had much to gain by participation. Rudy wants to lead the whole party, and must do so if he is the nominee. For better or worse, the national media has treated Rudy’s non-appearance in the Straw Poll as unwillingness to even compete for the mainstream social conservatives, much less promote any part of their ideology. Human nature dictates that those disregarded find the development of future enthusiasm for those who have disregarded rather difficult.

Almost everyone present today, and every voter is also probably a leadership figure in their caucus, found Rudy’s absence to be quite offensive, in an unusually personal way. The level of hostility toward Rudy was very surprising; he was clearly no one’s second choice today. Rudy needs to campaign somewhere other than high dollar special invite events in Iowa and the need is becoming more acute if he is seriously competing here. We should probably know the answer to that question in the next couple of weeks.

The biggest winner was Mike Huckabee-because he gained the most. Gov. Huckabee seemed to be surging in the last couple of weeks. Huck and his family (met his daughter and daughter in law today and both are as charming as the Gov and obviously big assets) are tremendously likeable; his debate performances have been consistently top flight; and, his campaign themes are an appealing blend of Republican “base” issues (abortion/homosexual marriage) with creative economic and energy policy so his previous failure to catch fire with the Republican primary voters was puzzling. Money typically follows a winner so perhaps some deep pockets shared the larger skepticism.

Things seemed to be changing over the last couple of weeks, more anecdotally than statistically. Conventional wisdom still thought Sam Brownback had second locked up today but most of the undecideds that I know seemed to be drifting to Huckabee in the last several days. Huck seemed a little more aggressive on the trail. There seemed to be a little more media around the Razorback.

Well, there was more than a scented zephyr floating Huckabee’s name in the wind happening. Huck outperformed anyone’s expectations today. This will generate a ton of media in the next couple of weeks. If Huckabee really has legs, he can exploit the next week’s publicity by create a pivotal moment. All made possible for him by today’s showing at the Ames Straw Poll, which is, indeed, a lot to gain.

Mitt, but not by a knock out.

Mitt reaffirms Iowa status, Huck joins the top tier and Sam and Tom stay alive.

Mitt 4516 31.5% Keeps the Big Mo.
Huck 2587 18.1% Gets some Big Mo.
Sam 2192 15.3% Keeps the dream alive.
Tom T. 1961 13.7% Keeps going for the next round.
Ron Paul 1305 9.1% Better than expected.
Tommy 1039 7.3% The end.
Fred 203 1.4% The beginning.
Rudy 183 1.3% The very bad decision.
Duncan 174 1.2% Keep beating the drum, we need you.
McCain 101 1.1% Now he too belongs to the ages.
Cox 41 .1% Focus on the Senate, we need you too.

Thanks to Bonnie, Bill and Big Killer for timely updates on the results.

Live Debate Coverage from Des Moines

Today, the Real Sporer features another edition of live debate coverage. We’re fairly certain that our candidates will distinguish themselves from the wacky Dems, all of whom promised aggressive government spending, unconditional retreat from Iraq and socialized medicine in their recent appearance at the WorldKos convention.