RNC posts 2004 video of Obama calling the deficit under Bush “an enormous problem”
As Republicans this week extend their attacks on President Obama for the increasing federal debt, the RNC’s “rapid response” team has dredged up old video of then-Senate candidate Obama elaborating his views about the federal deficit during a 2004 debate.
In the course of his response to a moderator’s question about the “monstrous federal deficit,” Obama says it’s “an enormous problem” brought about by the Bush White House, which he calls “the most fiscally irresponsible administration in certainly my memory.”
“We have gone from trillion-dollar surpluses to trillion-dollar deficits in the blink of an eye,” Obama said. “Not all of those costs are the fault of the administration — obviously, 9/11 occurred and the decline in the economy. But what is also true is that it was aided and abetted by a set of fiscal policies that I think were on the wrong course.”
Man of Steele seems to have avoided kryptonite for now
After a weekend of some prominent Republicans calling for his resignation — Liz Cheney among them — and a round of phone calls trying to explain himself, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele appears likely to hold onto his job through the election.
Washington Whispers has a look at how Steele’s gaffe on Afghanistan does not affect Republican fundraising, which is obviously key to the November elections when Republicans are hoping to gain seats and possibly control of Congress from President Barack Obama’s Democrats.
After the election will be quite another story for the RNC chairman, with Republicans probably looking to replace Steele. Hotline has a piece on possible candidates in the next go-around. (Sarah Palin is not considered to be a serious contender).
Among prominent Republicans unhappy with Steele’s Afghanistan comments is Senator John McCain, who in an interview from Kabul with ABC’s “This Week” said Steele’s comments were “wildly inaccurate.”
It wasn’t the first time that Steele has been in hot water as chairman of the RNC, but Republicans are hoping it will be the last for the next four months until the elections are over.
Photo credit: Reuters/Sean Gardner (Steele at 2010 Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans April 2010)
Republican party chief says he’s staying put despite spending furor
Under fire for the Republican National Committee’s free-wheeling spending on posh hotels, private jets and a party at a Los Angeles nightclub, committee Chairman Michael Steele said Monday he will not resign despite the controversy.
“No,” he said flatly on ABC’s “Good Morning America” when asked whether he would step down. It was his first television interview since the controversial spending came to light. “When I first heard about this behavior going on, I was very angry and we dealt with it.”
Steele has been excoriated over the last week, including by some members of his own party, for spending that included $2,000 at a sex-themed nightclub as well as tens of thousands of dollars spent on luxury hotels, private planes and limousines in the month of February.
“I’m not staying in fancy hotels, in the Four Seasons, and flying around in corporate jets,” Steele said. One RNC staffer has already lost her job because of the nightclub incident. “We have managed the money in a way that has allowed us to compete in some races that we otherwise wouldn’t have been able to compete in.”
Last year, Republicans wrested victories in two key governors’ races — Virginia and New Jersey — and also won an upset victory in January to fill Democratic U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts after he died from cancer.
Steele said that the organization was establishing some controls to rein in spending since Republicans no longer control either chamber in the U.S. Congress or the White House.
“A lot of our donors, our major donors, are used to a particular type of event, we’ve been scaling those back,” he said, predicting that the RNC would have a good fundraising effort in April despite media reports that some donors are sending their money elsewhere. Still, he said he understood the furor of donors and members.
The dude’s already played the race card by claiming that he’s facing a raised bar. He’s also employed an oblique liberal slur for white men by railing against “old boys.” The fact that they are his party’s most loyal constituency seems to have been lost on him.
Steele’s abortion comments anger fellow Republicans
Michael Steele has gone and put his foot in his mouth again.
In an interview with GQ magazine, the Republican National Committee chairman described abortion as an “individual choice” and said individual states should decide its legality.
Those comments, predictably, have drawn a sharp rebuke from other Republican leaders who say he should stick to the party’s core position that abortion should be outlawed nationwide.
“Chairman Steele, as the leader of America’s pro-life conservative party, needs to re-read the Bible, the U.S. Constitution, and the 2008 GOP Platform. He then needs to get to work — or get out of the way,” said former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, a former rival for the RNC job.
Mike Huckabee called Steele’s remarks troubling. “For Chairman Steele to even infer that taking a life is totally left up to the individual is not only a reversal of Republican policy and principle, but it’s a violation of the most basic of human rights,” the former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate said on his blog.
Steele was widely praised as an eloquent speaker when he was elected as chairman of the Republican Party at the end of January. But since then, he’s spent plenty of time apologizing for off-hand comments that have angered many in the party and prompted some to suggest that he should resign.
In a statement sent out Thursday, Steele said he has always opposed abortion and said the Supreme Court decision that made it legal should be repealed. “The Republican Party is and will continue to be the party of life,” he said.
The debate on abortion is merely opinion. Moral values are based on either self-centered, God-based or society-based non-provable basic assumptions. For the Catholic viewpoint let me excerpt from the free ebook series “And Gulliver Returns” (http://andgulliverreturns.info) The Abortion chapter in Book 4 elaborates the pros and cons of the 3 ethical assumptions. Let me attempt to summarize the changing Catholic position. From the 13th Century the views of St. Thomas Aquinas, that male embryos got their souls about 4 weeks after conception, females somewhat later, were the standard. His was a Christionized view of Aristotle’s ideas.
The crux of the modern idea, that the soul is infused at conception, might be traced to St. Paul (Romans 5:12) who started the ball rolling on ‘original sin.’ 500 years later St. Augustine popularized the idea. But the Blessed Virgin was born without original sin, her Immaculate Conception. Pope Pius IX declared this in 1854. Then in 1870 he decided that popes were infallible in church doctrine. So was his pronouncement retroactive?
Recent popes have generally followed Pius’s idea that the soul enters the zygote at the moment of conception. This brings with it some theological problems. Since many fertilized ova never implant in the uterus what happens to these little souls?
If you are really interested in the question, see the aforementioned chapter. It is done in detail.
Additionally, unwanted children don’t have a fair chance at a happy life, which may affect their chances of a joyful afterlife. Adoption is only a limited option since there are not unlimited adoptive parents–especially for questionably healthy babies–like crack babies. Abortion is good from both a self-centered and a society based morality. It is also moral from most religious views, if they don’t follow the Pope’s opinions. If you are a conservative Catholic who believes that the Pope gets his opinions directly from God, it makes sense. But if you are not a strong Catholic your opinions are certainly on thin ice–logically.
Bush gives Republicans a little pep talk ahead of election
WASHINGTON – President George W. Bush dropped by the Republican National Committee headquarters unannounced to give the staff a little pep talk Tuesday amid polls showing Republicans trailing in the presidential contest and scores of key congressional races one week out from the general election.
Bush, with record low popularity ratings, has largely been unseen on the campaign trail this year, relegated to participating in private fundraisers for Republican presidential hopeful John McCain and congressional candidates.
“He encouraged them to work hard for John McCain and keep turning out the vote until the final ballot is cast next week,” White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said after the 20-minute visit. “He also took the opportunity to thank the staff for all of their efforts during this election cycle and for their support of him over the last eight years.”
The latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Tuesday found McCain trailed rival Democrat Barack Obama by 4 percentage points. Reuters/Zogby polls for battleground states released on Monday showed Obama holding a narrow lead in Virginia, North Carolina, Missouri, Ohio and Nevada. McCain had a solid lead in West Virginia and was ahead in Indiana.
In congressional races, Republicans must defend 23 Senate seats and are expected to lose at least a few of them, including Virginia and New Mexico. Democrats must defend a dozen seats and only one, held by Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, is considered vulnerable.
Republicans are also finding a seat once considered safe, held by Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, now particularly vulnerable because the long-serving lawmaker was convicted of seven counts related to corruption.
In a rare scene, when Bush returned to the White House, he did not immediately get out of his armored limousine and Secret Service agents surrounded his vehicle with machine guns at the ready.
I wish every one in this world was as secure as mr bush Was.
http://WWW.speedylimousine.com
Who needs foreign tourists? Luxury chains have Palin!
Alaska Gov. and hockey mom Sarah Palin, who’s not only John McCain’s vice presidential pick, but a luxury fashion maverick.
The Republican National Committee has spent more than $150,000 since late August to outfit Palin and her family in the fanciest of duds from department stores like Saks and Neiman Marcus, says politico.com.
The financial disclosure records, included under the line item “itemized coordinated expenditures,” show RNC expenditures at Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York of $49,425.74 in September. Based on Saks’ September comparable-store sales of $273.2 million, Palin accounted for .018 percent of sales.
The RNC also spent $75,062.63 during one September trip to Neiman Marcus, says politico.com, which would represent .012 percent of Neiman’s September comparable-store sales of $406 million.
The RNC spent only $789.72 at Neiman-owned Barneys New York but dropped $5,102.71 at Bloomingdale’s, which is operated by Macy’s, said politico.com, a website that tracks political news.
Hefty primping expenditures on the campaign trail are nothing new. U.S. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-NY, received guff for her expensive custom-made pantsuits, which cost upward of $6,350 each.
The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on Palin’s hair and makeup, and made $295 in purchases at high-end children’s stores Pacifier and Steiniauf & Stroller Inc., according to politico.com.
It is a nice gesture to say the clothing items will be donated to charity — which means a big tax write off! — but, in these dire financial times is grotesque for a candidate (and FAMILY) to be furnished clothing from Neiman Marcus and other high end stores. I will feel the same if the dems use political contributions for extravagent clothing. Belt tightening should start AT THE TOP. The GOP could have chosen to be role models, instead of hypocrites. I wish all camps would sober up and start acting more like they really understand the budgets of Joe and Josephine Plumber.
Game On: Republican convention ends, tell us your thoughts…
The Republican convention is over, a whirlwind event interrupted by a hurricane hitting the Gulf Coast and energized by the pick of a woman vice presidential candidate. And with it comes the home stretch of the (seemingly interminable) 2008 presidential election.
Did presidential hopeful John McCain finally win over the conservative base by picking the conservative Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his No. 2? Does he run the risk of alienating the independents drawn to him in the past with her selection? Did he lay out enough policy specifics to refute charges by rival Democratic candidate Barack Obama that details were lacking?
What else do voters want and need to hear now that the conventions are over? Game on, bring on the debates!
(And yes, it’s OK to admit that you skipped the pre-game warmup to McCain to catch the NFL season opener between the Washington Redskins and New York Giants…)
Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage.
- Photo credit: Reuters/Mike Segar
After reading a majority of the comments,am convinced they must have been composed at a REPUBLICAN CONVENTION.Or the American people are realy nuts.If the’War Hero’does get elected,all the hocky moms who are trying to emulate the [Alaskian Diplomate&Wolf hunter] can start crying, when he starts the Draft up again.Which never should have ceased to begin with. God help this country. EX G.I.
Why does Sarah Palin’s biopic sound so familiar?
ST. PAUL – “Mother. Moose hunter. Maverick.” As a film on vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin began at the Republican National Convention on Thursday night, a strangely familiar melody played in the background.
The swelling strings triggered associations of family, oil and … J.R. Ewing? Yes, the song bore a striking similarity to the theme song from “Dallas.”
Listen for yourself:
Sarah Palin bio (from about 0:35)
Dallas opening credits (from about 0:10)
Cousin Bobby and tom: get a grip, this person ought not to be 1000 miles within the Oval Office. Tom: Wow—way to go with the fantabulous acheivements, Palin, doin’ real good up there in Alaska; why not stay there?
Inside the Tent: On the verge of violent protests
Sarah Miller of Eagan, Minnesota, a single mom and college student, talks about goals of protesters at the Republican National Convention, and the likelihood of further violence as the convention draws to a close.
After this video was filmed on Thursday afternoon, several hundred anti-war protestors had hoped to march to the convention hall to confront Republicans, but were blocked by police clad in riot gear on a bridge several blocks away.
Inside the Tent has more than 40 delegates and other attendees in Denver and St. Paul, equipped with video cameras to capture the conventions from the ground up.
(Additional reporting by Andy Sullivan)
Click here for a full list of contributors at the Republican National Convention.
Click here for more Inside the Tent contributions.
Click here for more Reuters 2008 election coverage.
Inside the Tent: Twin Cities residents on protests and security
The Twin Cities have been the scene of sometimes violent protests and a heavy security presence during the Republican National Convention. Kelly Nuxoll of Huffington Post’s Off the Bus talked to two residents about what they think and how they’ve been affected.
Jonathan Hunter, St. Paul
“This is not the world I live in.”
Rick Engman, Minneapolis
“I don’t mind a non-violent protest, but when people start threatening other people’s freedom of speech like the Republican National Convention’s meeting … then there’s a problem.”
http://mediacdn.reuters.com/blogs/2008-09-04/19.05.27-eab3559bf74a2ea455d64a8cb6c48f18.flvInside the Tent has more than 40 delegates and other attendees in Denver and St. Paul, equipped with video cameras to capture the conventions from the ground up. Nuxoll is not a Reuters employee and any opinions expressed are her own.
Click here for a full list of contributors at the Republican National Convention.
Very stupid critique. Running a deficit when the economy was in good shape was not smart. But when the economy sank into the Great Recession at the end of the Bush presidency, it was necessary to run a deficit to rescue the economy. If Bush had not run up the deficit, when it was imperative to have one, the pain would have been much less. But this is too complex for GOP rank and file to understand.