It became something of a running joke in 1996, when Bob Dole publicly conceded, many times, that he hadn’t even read the Republican Party’s platform. ”I have due respect for the platform,” Dole said at one point after his convention. ”I read a lot of parts that I thought were essential.”

Twelve years later, we’ve reached the point at which a presidential candidate not only won’t read his platform, but doesn’t much care what’s in it.

Jean from Ferrisburgh, Vt., wants the Republican Party to get off “the global-warming bus.” Paul from Carrollton, Texas, wants it to “reject fetal stem-cell research.” And Larry from Waynesboro, Pa., wants the party to promise to “deport those who are here illegally.”

Republicans are inviting suggestions for their party platform this year, and thousands have responded online. But when a committee meets to draft the document in Minneapolis next week, one voice will be largely absent: John McCain’s.... Instead of fighting with party activists to form the platform around his own ideas, Sen. McCain has taken a hands-off approach.

McCain and his party’s base disagree on a few hot-button issues, and GOP activists are intent on making sure their platform reflects their priorities. McCain’s response is to ignore the platform altogether.

This certainly certainly seems like a reminder of the relevance of platforms in modern politics. Ostensibly, the Republican Party’s platform and the Republican Party’s presidential nominee would be on the same page. Indeed, from a historical perspective, voters who sought to learn more about a presidential candidate’s policy agenda would turn to the candidate’s party platform and read all about his priorities. And yet now, McCain won’t write, read, or care a whit about the platform that comes out of his own convention.

I remember working on a project in grad school that led me to read a lot of old party platforms, and it was a pretty fascinating way to watch the transitions of major parties over the decades. But at this point, they’re antiquated, meaningless documents. It’s probably time to scrap them altogether.

In any party or political movement, there’s bound to be a mainstream and a fringe. As a rule, the fringe looks to the mainstream for validation, and the mainstream looks at the fringe as kind of icky.

Things get interesting, of course, when the line between the mainstream and the fringe blurs. Take the Republican National Committee, for example.

The RNC is a fairly predictable, far-right animal. It’s run by lobbyists and business interests who divide their time between raising money and lying about Democrats. The RNC likes to exploit the ignorance of its base, and stoke the culture-war fires from time to time, but generally steer clear of the kind of insanity one might find in, say, a thread at the Free Republic. It’s the whole mainstream/fringe dynamic in practice.

At least, that’s usually the case. Yesterday morning, RNC Chairman Mike Duncan sent out this email to Republican donors.

It seems the Democrats’ would-be president of the United States of America really believes that the rest of the world’s problems, and approval, trump the interests of Americans when it comes to how we live our lives and where our money is spent. [...]

A bill he has sponsored in the U.S. Senate, the so-called Global Poverty Act
(S. 2433), would raise the amount of American tax dollars allocated to United Nations’ redistribution efforts to $845 billion.

That’s $2,500 from every American taxpayer, when many in our country already are struggling to make ends meet.

And with that, the line between the unhinged fringe and the Republican National Committee has disappeared. The lunatics, it appears, are running the asylum.

Continue reading »

The RNC's new game plan to is straightforward enough: Republicans are ready to exploit intra-party criticisms among the Dems.

Hours before the polls closed Tuesday in the final two Democratic presidential primaries, the Republican National Committee began circulating a video of Hillary Clinton questioning Barack Obama’s qualifications to be commander-in-chief, and acknowledging John McCain has this important presidential credential.

“Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the campaign, I will bring a lifetime of experience and Senator Obama will bring a speech that he gave in 2002,” Clinton says in the one-minute video of CNN’s coverage of a news conference she held on March 8 – the day Obama won the Wyoming caucuses. “I think that is a significant difference. I think that since we now know Senator McCain will be the nominee for the Republican Party, national security will be front and center in this election. We all know that.

“And I think it is imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold. And I believe I have done that. Certainly, Senator McCain has done that. And you will have to ask Senator Obama with respect to his candidacy.”

An RNC official told CNN that Republicans would use Clinton’s criticisms of Obama “repeatedly” throughout the general election campaign.

Now, with Clinton’s help, pushing back against the RNC’s efforts isn’t too difficult. For one thing, I think most Americans realize that intra-party, like-minded rivals sometimes get a little aggressive in the midst of a heated primary. When one Dem attacks another Dem, it’s be taken with a grain of salt.

For another, once Hillary Clinton steps up to start defending Obama and going after John McCain, the RNC’s project will certainly lose its salience. By Saturday, the RNC's latest push shouldn't matter, but it's nevertheless something to keep an eye on.

On Friday, John McCain’s campaign unveiled its first general-election TV ad — the one that uses the word “American” one too many times — and the Democratic National Committee did what was expected: it responded by criticizing John McCain.

It wasn’t even an especially hard-hitting criticism. The DNC statement quoted Howard Dean calling McCain “another out of touch Bush Republican who promises four more years of the same failed leadership.” In light of the interrogation footage from Vietnam included in the ad, Dean added, “While we honor McCain’s military service, the fact is Americans want a real leader who offers real solutions, not a blatant opportunist who doesn’t understand the economy and is promising to keep our troops in Iraq for 100 years.”

This seemed pretty routine, which is why I found the Republican National Committee’s overheated response rather odd.

Frank Donatelli, the deputy chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), sought to drive a wedge between Dean and Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) over the comments.

“Howard Dean owes John McCain an immediate apology and both Senators Clinton and Obama should unequivocally denounce this disgraceful attack,” said Donatelli.

The RNC added that Dean’s remarks amounted to a “character smear.”

Really? The Republican National Committee, of all people, believes it’s beyond the pale to call someone a “blatant opportunist”? Especially when the person is a “blatant opportunist”?

The RNC may protest, but McCain is probably the most shameless “blatant opportunist” in American politics today. Have Republicans even seen McCain’s flip-flop list? Does it not occur to them that he abandoned his principles — including rejecting legislation that he’s personally co-sponsored — for partisan gain?

  Once in a while, it’s worth taking a moment to realize how very, very odd Republicans can be.

There’s a new rule at the Republican National Committee. Refer to the two leading Democratic presidential candidates simply as “Barack” and “Hillary” and you’ll be fined $10.

The reason: Using first names makes the candidates sound more likable but calling them “Senator Obama” and “Senator Clinton” makes them sound more distant and bureaucratic.

“I don’t think people are actually being fined,” says one insider. But everyone is being “encouraged” to follow the rule.

It’s like a swear jar in which people who use profanity are supposed to be put money in a pot every time they use profanity. It’s supposed to be a deterrent.

Only at the RNC, the swear jar is a humanizing-Democrats jar.

No, I usually don’t understand Republicans, either.

"There has been extensive destruction of the e-mails of White House officials by the RNC."

Republicans are divided on Iraq. And domestic policy. And political strategies.

But even more dramatically, they're really divided over the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee.

The week after the Republicans were handed a series of devastating election defeats, the White House announced that Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) would take over as RNC chair. If recent history held, there was no appeal in the process -- the national committee has historically rubber-stamped sitting presidents' choice for party chairs.

But not this time, not with this president, and not with Martinez, who was immediately a controversial choice. The Republican base labeled him the "Harriet Miers of RNC chairs" and went to work in opposition to his selection.

At this point, with the Republican National Committee poised to make its decision, it looks like the fight could get ugly.

Mel Martinez is taking over for Ken "The Talking Point" Mehlman at the GOP. Hmmm...Mel was the guy that passed out talking points on the floor on how to use the Terri Schiavo affair for political gain.

The legal counsel to Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) admitted yesterday that he was the author of a memo citing the political advantage to Republicans of intervening in the case of Terri Schiavo, the senator said in an interview last night.---Martinez, a freshman who was secretary of housing and urban development for most of President Bush's first term, said he had not read the one-page memo. He said he inadvertently passed it to Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who had worked with him on the issue. After that, officials gave the memo to reporters for ABC News and The Washington Post.

Remember how the wingnuts were so intense on calling these talking points forgeries? And not surprising---Power line led the way.

Say it ain't so: Ken "Action Figure" Mehlman is leaving the RNC.

                      Video - WMV              Video - QT

CNN:

Several Republican sources tell CNN that Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman is all but certain to step down at the end of the year, and the White House already is searching for a replacement or replacements to lead the party into the 2008 presidential campaign cycle.

Continue reading »

 On Face The Nation, Bob Schieffer wouldn't buy Ken Mehlman's "lame" excuses for running a racist ad against Harold Ford when he paid for it. He called into question the notion that Republicans hold all the cards when we're talking about "values" because actions speak LOUDER than slogans. Heading down the stretch to November 7th, this administration has shown America that "winning" is their core value. If Bob calls you lame, well---you're just lame.

Video-WMP Video-QT

SCHIEFFER: But, but Mr. Mehlman, the logic... if I think something is wrong but I take advantage of a law that allows me to take advantage of that, that's pretty lame, if I may say so.

Transcript via Face the Nation (There's also video of Jack Murtha too)

Continue reading »

I know, duh...

• No Quarter looks at some of the more egregious examples of overt racism in campaign ads and the impact in key states.  But on a more positive note, the racial make-up of key committees, should the Democrats regain the majority is something to look forward to.

• PFAW questions the validity of the "new face of the black conservative."  Remember that RNC ad calling black women "ho"s?  Ken Mehlman still thinks pulling the race card is the way to pull black conservatives in.

• And finally, Jesse Jackson and a union group demand that Walmart fire Terry Nelson, the GOP consultant responsible for the Harold Ford ad.  Nelson was hired by Walmart (with a Democratic consultant) to encourage voter registration and get information out to its employees. Luckily, it looks like that ad is backfiring on Corker .

The Christian activist who wrote about the "myth" of the Separation between Church and State is doing his bit for the RNC again.

People for the American Way:

David Barton is doing his part to encourage right-wing voters to get out and vote in November by telling them they'll have to answer to the Lord if they stay home

The results of this year's contest will determine whether America will keep moving forward in winning the culture war, or whether we will start retreating. Be active this election! Much is at stake!

What will Christians say to themselves (and to the Lord) if: (1) they don't vote this election, (2) we lose pro-family champions in the House and Senate, (3) after the election, a Supreme Court Justice announces his retirement (two-thirds of the Court is now older than 65), and (4) we no longer have the necessary votes to confirm a fifth strict-constructionist Justice to the Supreme Court and thus begin bringing the culture war to its well-deserved demise? I certainly wouldn't want to try to explain that one to my friends or family (or especially to the Lord!). Just a thought for those who might need additional motivation!

One has to wonder if this is part of the message the GOP is paying Barton to spread around the country. 

 So this is what's become of our political process. An "independent expenditure" negative ad, which bears the endorsement of the RNC, can't be taken off the air even when the RNC Chairman and the candidate himself "want" it removed. In the spirit of civilized discourse,

Video WMP    Video MOV  

I think ads like this have no place in politics. But at the same time, if the RNC can endorse these sorts of ads with impunity, why can't the DNC put together a patently offensive and racist ad, then just simply back away from it when there's an outcry? Although Timmeh and Wolf did a good job of pressing the issue, can you imagine the backlash the DNC would endure if they tried such a thing? If Parkinsons victims are "fair game", then what isn't?

BLITZER:  All right.  I know this is not your ad, but if you really, really wanted to get it lifted, you probably could.

CORKER:  No, that's not true.  We actually have been on national TV, as we are now.  We've asked senators to call.  These are independent expenditure
groups.  We want it down.  We do not believe that -- certainly it does not represent our campaign.  We have nothing to do with it.  We believe that it's
tacky and has no place in this race.

Full transcript via CNN:

Continue reading »

 The answer to Josh's question is no. He's a guy who isn't afraid to smear people with racism. He's a rich white guy who can spot insanely offensive racism instantly---except when he has a hand in it. He only pays the bills after all--why should Kenny boy be responsible for the content? Timmeh did a good job on the segment.

Video-WMP Video-QT

TPM:

was just watching Tim Russert interview Ken Mehlman about the RNC's anti-Ford ad running in Tennessee. Russert asked him point blank if he would pull the ad given the outcry over racist overtones. He said it was an independent expenditure, so he wrote a check and that was it. He claimed to have no control over the content and no power to pull it. If that's really true, why does the legalese at the end of the ad state: "The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertisement. Paid for by the Republican National Committee and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. www.gop.com"? Wouldn't the legalese imply that Ken Mehlman has the power to pull the ad? If not, then how would anyone ever find out who bears responsibility? Just wondering how this really works....read on

RUSSERT:  Ken Mehlman, the Republican candidate in Tennessee has asked that you take that ad off the air, that it is over the top. Former Republican Senator William Cohen says it’s, quote, “overt racist appeal.”

Will you take that ad down? 

MEHLMAN:  Tim, I don’t have the authority to take it down or put it up.  It’s what called an independent expenditure. 

MSNBC has the transcipt posted:

Continue reading »

 Keith issued arguably his most powerful Special Comment yet tonight. This time he takes on the GOP's newest fearmongering ad which quotes Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri superimposed over pictures of explosions with the sound of a ticking bomb in the background. As if that wasn't enough, it's topped off with the cryptic message echoing LBJ's 1960 "Daisy" ad that ran just once: These are the stakes.
 

Video-WMP  Video-QT

In my opinion, the most important point Keith makes concerns the recent uproar over the video CNN showed this week of a sniper attack on US troops in Iraq. House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter and Congressman Brian Bilbray have come out strong against it calling it a "terrorist snuff film" yet they seem to have no problem with a RNC ad which is really nothing short of a terrorist propaganda film itself.

UPDATE:  Transcripts below the fold...

Continue reading »