If Pat Robertson was Muslim, his Pa jab would get him arrested, but...

GOP memo touts new terror attack as way to reverse party's decline

By DOUG THOMPSON
Publisher, Capitol Hill Blue
Nov 10, 2005, 06:19
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artma...ter_7639.shtml

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

A confidential memo circulating among senior Republican leaders suggests that a new attack by terrorists on U.S. soil could reverse the sagging fortunes of President George W. Bush as well as the GOP and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."

The closely-guarded memo lays out a list of scenarios to bring the Republican party back from the political brink, including a devastating attack by terrorists that could “validate” the President’s war on terror and allow Bush to “unite the country” in a “time of national shock and sorrow.”

The memo says such a reversal in the President's fortunes could keep the party from losing control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections.

GOP insiders who have seen the memo admit it’s a risky strategy and point out that such scenarios are “blue sky thinking” that often occurs in political planning sessions.

“The President’s popularity was at an all-time high following the 9/11 attacks,” admits one aide. “Americans band together at a time of crisis.”

[canis582]

That makes me sick, but its how the republicans think.

Faux News would love a terror attack because their ratings would go through the roof. (again)

[JackWhite]

[ QUOTE ]
That makes me sick, but its how the republicans think.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt they were hoping for a major new terrorist attack. The memo simply pointed out that it would help Bush politically, which is probably true because the country would unite around the President, like after 9/11.

The Oklahoma City bombing in '95 helped Clinton politically. If someone pointed that out shortly after the bombing, would it mean they were happy about the attack? I doubt it. There is nothing wrong with pointing out the politically realities that these type of things usually help the President.

This story comes from Capitol Hill Blue (www.capitolhillblue.com).

I love their banner…

“Because nobody’s life, liberty or property are safe while Congress is in session or the White House is occupied”

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
There is nothing wrong with pointing out the politically realities that these type of things usually help the President.

[/ QUOTE ]
Canis isn't interested in hearing the realities of politics - or life.

[canis582]

Thats it...attack the source and not the information.

[ QUOTE ]
Thats it...attack the source and not the information.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF? "Attack?"

I din do no steeek-ing uh-tack, man. Wha'joo tawkin'?

Joo wan see uh-tack? I keek you nuts!



<ul type="square"> [/list]

I don't see what is wrong with this. Explain it to me without resorting to personal attacks please.

[TM1212]

[ QUOTE ]
That makes me sick, but its how the republicans think.

Faux News would love a terror attack because their ratings would go through the roof. (again)

[/ QUOTE ]

Just Fox news or all news stations you biased liberal. I love when people attack fox news for being biased while being biased themselfs.

[whiskeytown]

the problem becomes when Republicans will start ignoring warning signs in an attempt to repeat 9/11 and solidify the country behind the next Republican puppet.

Anyone who thinks they aren't capable of letting people die to further their agenda is living in fantasyland. Sheeeit...they're letting good American boys die everyday in the Middle East, just so they can look tough and get re-elected.

RB