Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jmhollen who wrote (631716)	9/23/2004 7:33:20 PM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

FLASH: Karl Rove's game plan, as unearthed by Steve Chapman: chicagotribune.com. Steve Chapman Once upon a time, a memo appeared ... The untold story of Bush vs. Kerry as told by Karl Rove--even though he'll probably claim he had nothing to do with anything written below Published September 23, 2004 Memo To: John Kerry, Republican mole From: Karl Rove, White House political adviser I just wanted to let you know that the game plan is working perfectly. By all logic, President Bush should be packing boxes for his move back to Crawford, Texas, by now. He's got a sluggish economy, Iraq is turning into such a disaster that even Republicans accuse the president of incompetence, and Martha Stewart is going to jail while Osama bin Laden is free as a bird. Given all this, the Democrats had every reason to think they could not only defeat George W. Bush--again!--but actually put their guy in the White House. Unfortunately for them, they made the mistake of nominating our guy, who is merely pretending to be their guy. And now they can't figure out why the campaign is going badly. Their naivete is almost touchingly childlike. You'd think they'd never heard of Richard Nixon or dirty tricks. But in all seriousness, let's review some of the tactics we've implemented. They fall into the following categories: Making Michael Dukakis look good. People thought he looked like a doofus riding in a tank wearing that goofy helmet. But you outdid him when you put on an anti-contamination suit to tour the space shuttle orbiter. You looked like one of those sausages that race around the field at the Milwaukee Brewers' home games. Dukakis would never have let himself be photographed in that outfit--heck, Ben Stiller wouldn't have let himself be photographed in it. Those windsurfing suits are almost as bad, so put them on any chance you get. I'll keep you posted on our plan to have you visit a fire station and put on a firefighter's helmet--backward! Impersonating Thurston Howell III. One of the ways rich politicians show their kinship with "Joe Six-Pack" is speaking the universal language of sports. But you've cleverly "bungled" every opportunity to show your sports savvy. You went to Michigan and said, "There is nothing better than Buckeye football." When someone mentioned stock-car racing, you asked, "Who among us does not love NASCAR?" You said your favorite Red Sox player of all time was Eddie Yost, who never played for Boston. Maybe I'm overoptimistic, but that last one might even put Massachusetts in play this year. Those remarks were scripted by our crack staff, of course, but they didn't equal your brilliant ad lib when you showed up in Green Bay and made a reference to the Packers' "Lambert Field"--when everyone this side of Paris know it's "Lambeau." The only thing that could have hurt the Democratic ticket more in the Dairy State is to confess that you're lactose-intolerant. Creating your own woman problem. Bill Clinton had Gennifer and Monica, but you've got Teresa. It was shrewd to equip you with a fabulously wealthy wife who speaks with a foreign accent, but Teresa has expanded the role far beyond my fondest hopes. That speech she gave at the Democratic National Convention--well, I haven't witnessed such a prolonged display of self-absorption since Alanis Morissette's last CD. One of our biggest challenges this year is finding a way to help Bush among black voters who would rather eat dirt than vote Republican. But for a rich white lady to proclaim herself "African-American" might cause them to reconsider. Marie Antoinette has nothing on your main squeeze. I loved that remark about the hurricane victims in the Caribbean needing food and electricity more than clothing: "Let them go naked for a while, at least the kids." My only worry is that it might pull in a lot of the pedophile vote. Making yourself look hopelessly confused on Iraq. Honestly, who could have imagined one U.S. senator could come up with a different position for every day of the week? At this point, I doubt God himself could figure out what you really think about Iraq. But here's what you can do to seal the deal: I'll plant a question at your next town hall meeting, asking what colors you'd like to see in a new Iraqi flag. Your answer: "Plaid." Maybe we should scratch that idea. If you do too good a job of botching this campaign, people may start to figure out that you're actually working for us. For that matter, I wonder if we've gone too far already. So I'll tell you what. For the time being, do your best to look like a competent politician who wants to win the election. I know it's a stretch, but try. Really. ---------- E-mail: schapman@tribune.com

To: jmhollen who wrote (631716)	9/23/2004 7:41:38 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Stupid is as stupid does or kerry is dead meat. THE ANTI-WAR TURN IS A LOSER BY DICK MORRIS September 23, 2004 -- STUNG by criticism that his campaign lacks direction and focus, Sen. John Kerry has chosen to base his candidacy on an all-out assault on President Bush's record in Iraq — indeed, opted to move to the left decisively and attack the war head-on. Liberals will cheer Kerry's new-found decisiveness, but it opens the way for Bush to deal him a counterstroke that can all but end this election and finish off Kerry for good. Kerry's right flank is now gapingly vulnerable to a Bush attack. According to Scott Rasmussen's tracking polls, 30 to 40 percent of Kerry's voters disagree with his new leftward tilt on Iraq. That is, even as the Democrat condemned the war in Iraq as a "diversion" from the central mission of the war on terror, a large minority of his own voters disagrees and sees it as "integral" to the battle to respond to 9/11. Kerry has moved to the left, leaving about one-third of his vote behind. Bush can now move in and peel off Kerry's moderate supporters. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has opened the door for this new Bush offensive by declaring the invasion of Iraq "illegal" and equating the deadly terror raids by Iraqi guerillas with the embarrassing but hardly lethal sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners by the U.S. military. With those incendiary claims put into play, it is now legitimate for Bush to attack the secretary-general and ask his opponent to take a stand for or against Annan's remarks. In his current incarnation as a dove, Kerry dares not dissent too sharply from the views of the U.N. leader. Bush can develop a key campaign issue over whether it is legal for the United States to act in its own self-defense without obtaining Security Council approval. Ratification by an assemblage of nations bribed through the Oil-for-Food program should not be a prerequisite for American action. The backdrop of this new emphasis on Iraq is Bush's largely successful effort to appeal to women in his battle against terror. After misdirecting his rhetoric for months, echoing a macho tough guy approach, the president found his stride at the GOP Convention and, with the able assistance of his wife, portrayed the war in Iraq and the global battle against terror as an effort to keep American families safe at home. This linkage of combat in Baghdad with safety on Main Street has reduced the gender gap in the polls to historic lows as women have resonated with Bush's new emphasis. Now that Kerry has moved too far left in a misguided effort to enthuse his political base, Bush can close in for the kill and defend our action in Iraq and our global combativeness against terrorism as fundamental to the protection of our families at home. Part of Kerry's vulnerability on the Iraq issue is because he is really not proposing anything new to deal with the war. His four-part "plan" — which centers on urging our allies and the U.N. to do more and calls for strong efforts to provide jobs to Iraqis (the John Edwards message, sent abroad) and to train Iraqi police and troops — just mirrors what Bush is already doing. That is, it is only in retrospect — in criticizing past actions — that Kerry really differs from Bush. He is proposing no real alternative for action in the future. Since elections are about the future and history books about the past, Bush can fairly ask Kerry what he would do differently. When the Democrat ticks off his agenda, Bush can reply with his statistics saying (in effect), Been there, done that. John Kerry has zigged when he should have zagged. He has chosen to fight over terror and Iraq when he should have stayed on domestic issues. He has tacked left when he should have stayed in the center on foreign issues and attacked on matters closer to home. Kerry has defined himself as a liberal — and will pay for it with his defeat. nypost.com