Congress 2006: A Timeless Strategy?
Mike Healy
February 07, 2006
President Bush?s top adviser last week outlined the game plan for the Republican Party heading into the 2006 congressional elections. Speaking at the Republican National Committee?s winter meeting, Karl Rove told assembled GOP personages, "Republicans have a post-9/11 worldview and many Democrats have a pre-9/11 worldview. That doesn't make them unpatriotic -- not at all. But it does make them wrong -- deeply and profoundly and consistently wrong."
This strategy is really nothing new. Republicans rode the national security card to unprecedented midterm victories in 2002, and drew from the terrorism well yet again in securing President Bush?s reelection in 2004. What Karl Rove is banking on is that the issue of national security is something of a cure-all for Republicans. He?s hoping that, in spite of America?s largest ever partisan lobbying scandal, the Katrina disaster, indictments coming down from every direction, and an economy nearly two-thirds of Americans feel has ?gotten worse? in the past five years.
Giving credit where credit is due, however, I have to assume Mr.Rove?s strategy has a very good chance of working. Whatever the year, 2002, 2004, 2006, 200X, national security is simply a timeless Republican issue. It?s like their Rolling Stones.
In fact, not only is this national security strategy likely to be successful against any future opponents to Republican, but, had Karl Rove been around earlier, it probably would have worked far into the past as well.
With that in mind, if they ever succeed in inventing a way back machine, let me be the first to submit my application to the Grand Ole Party?s historical political advertising team:
AD TITLE: Decision ?76: Liberty or DEATH?
ANNOUNCER: Thomas Jefferson thinks he?s the right man to lead America. He thinks he has a vision for where the United States should go.
Sadly, that direction doesn?t lead to a safe and secure America.
[Cut to graphic of dark blue background with text of The Declaration of Independence illegibly scrolling by with dark blue tint]
Impose highlighted excerpt reading ?He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.?]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously with highlight): Thomas Jefferson supports obstructionism and would rather play politics with national security than give the King President the tools he needs to keep America safe.
[Cut to next highlighted excerpt (simultaneously with voice over) reading ?He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people?]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously with highlight): Thomas Jefferson is dead set against the Department of Homeland Security.
[Cut to next highlighted excerpt reading ?He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.?]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously): Thomas Jefferson wants the military to be run not by the generals in the field, but by bureaucrats in Washington, DC.
[Cut to next highlighted excerpt reading ?For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: For abolishing the free System of. . . Laws in a neighbouring Province]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously): Thomas Jefferson believes in expanded rights for terrorists, and is more concerned about treating captured terrorists well than getting lifesaving information from them.
[Final excerpt, reading ?We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions?]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously): The ?world? as the supreme judge? Sound an awful lot like a ?Global Test? . . . Thomas Jefferson, wrong on defense, wrong for America.
Fade to black]
This strategy is really nothing new. Republicans rode the national security card to unprecedented midterm victories in 2002, and drew from the terrorism well yet again in securing President Bush?s reelection in 2004. What Karl Rove is banking on is that the issue of national security is something of a cure-all for Republicans. He?s hoping that, in spite of America?s largest ever partisan lobbying scandal, the Katrina disaster, indictments coming down from every direction, and an economy nearly two-thirds of Americans feel has ?gotten worse? in the past five years.
Giving credit where credit is due, however, I have to assume Mr.Rove?s strategy has a very good chance of working. Whatever the year, 2002, 2004, 2006, 200X, national security is simply a timeless Republican issue. It?s like their Rolling Stones.
In fact, not only is this national security strategy likely to be successful against any future opponents to Republican, but, had Karl Rove been around earlier, it probably would have worked far into the past as well.
With that in mind, if they ever succeed in inventing a way back machine, let me be the first to submit my application to the Grand Ole Party?s historical political advertising team:
AD TITLE: Decision ?76: Liberty or DEATH?
ANNOUNCER: Thomas Jefferson thinks he?s the right man to lead America. He thinks he has a vision for where the United States should go.
Sadly, that direction doesn?t lead to a safe and secure America.
[Cut to graphic of dark blue background with text of The Declaration of Independence illegibly scrolling by with dark blue tint]
Impose highlighted excerpt reading ?He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.?]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously with highlight): Thomas Jefferson supports obstructionism and would rather play politics with national security than give the King President the tools he needs to keep America safe.
[Cut to next highlighted excerpt (simultaneously with voice over) reading ?He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people?]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously with highlight): Thomas Jefferson is dead set against the Department of Homeland Security.
[Cut to next highlighted excerpt reading ?He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.?]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously): Thomas Jefferson wants the military to be run not by the generals in the field, but by bureaucrats in Washington, DC.
[Cut to next highlighted excerpt reading ?For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: For abolishing the free System of. . . Laws in a neighbouring Province]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously): Thomas Jefferson believes in expanded rights for terrorists, and is more concerned about treating captured terrorists well than getting lifesaving information from them.
[Final excerpt, reading ?We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions?]
ANNOUNCER (simultaneously): The ?world? as the supreme judge? Sound an awful lot like a ?Global Test? . . . Thomas Jefferson, wrong on defense, wrong for America.
Fade to black]
Print
Email
