Robert D. Novak: McCain TV performance dings candidacy

Related

The myth of McCain
---
Jan 27, 2006

By ROBERT D. NOVAK

WASHINGTON – Democratic strategists who had feared Sen. John McCain as the potentially unbeatable Republican candidate for President in 2008 were surprised and delighted by his dour appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” last Sunday.

One Democratic leader referred to McCain’s performance, in suggesting President Bush’s additional 21,000 troops may be inadequate, as “comatose.” A Republican adviser to McCain said it was one of the worst performances ever on “Meet the Press.” The senator’s defender said he could not be expected to be cheerful about a plan to send additional U.S. troops in harm’s way.

A footnote: Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is picking up support for President among House Republicans, headed by former Speaker Dennis Hastert.

Whither Rahm?

Sources close to Sen. Barack Obama are sure that Rep. Rahm Emanuel will not support his fellow Illinois Democrat for the Presidential nomination but will back Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

If so, Emanuel would be the only prominent Democratic officeholder in Illinois not for Obama. As a senior White House aide, Emanuel was one of President Bill Clinton’s favorites. Emanuel has been close to both of the Clintons.

Emanuel refuses to talk about his 2008 Presidential choice. He says he was deeply engaged in politics for two years as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and in his new role, as House Democratic Caucus chairman, he is committed to legislation.

Undermining Hillary

Jerome Corsi, co-author of the 2004 campaign book “Unfit for Command” attacking Sen. John Kerry’s war record, joined up Tuesday with the organization intended to similarly undermine Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2008 campaign.

TheVanguard.org is intended to be a right-wing version of the leftist MoveOn.Org. It was founded by Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, including Gil Amelio, former CEO of Apple and National Semiconductor.

Coming on board Feb. 16 as TheVanguard’s full-time editorial and creative director will be Richard Poe, who has served as editor-in-chief of FrontPage Magazine. He has been described as the conservative movement’s leading expert on MoveOn.Org’s strategy in bringing together disparate elements with a common viewpoint.

Bush on Abortion

President Bush extended his stay at Camp David last weekend to arrive back at the White House Monday afternoon, missing the annual anti-abortion March for Life that morning in Washington to mark the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision.

Bush was at the White House on Jan. 22, 2001, for the first March of his Presidency but sent a written statement rather than attend in person. For the next five years, he was out of town for the event: Charleston, W.Va. (2002), St. Louis (2003), Roswell, N.M. (2004), Camp David (2005) and Manhattan, Kan. (2006). His routine is to address the event by phone.

A footnote: Only two of the many Republican Presidential hopefuls attended this year’s March for Life: Rep. Duncan Hunter of California and Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas. On Sunday, Brownback visited the Holiday Inn on Capitol Hill, mingling with marchers from Iowa (the first state in the Presidential nomination process).

Dollars for Rudy

Texas Republican contributors are being solicited to spend $30,000 for dinner with former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani at the Houstonian Hotel in Houston Feb. 1 to finance his “presidential exploratory committee.” The “private” dinner will follow a 6:30 to 8 p.m. cocktail reception, costing $2,100 a person and $4,200 for couples.

The best-known host of Giuliani’s Houston event is billionaire oilman T. Boone Pickens Jr., chairman of the private equity firm BP Capital Management. Also on Giuliani’s Texas fund-raising team are Tom Hicks, whose company owns the Texas Rangers baseball team; oil industry executive Jim Lee; and lawyer Patrick C. Oxford.

A footnote: A Giuliani fund-raiser will be held Jan. 29 in Pacific Palisades, Calif., at the home of Bill Simon, the 2002 Republican candidate for governor of California, costing $2,300 a person and $4,600 per couple.

Robert D. Novak is a syndicated columnist and a commentator for the FOX network.

Robert Novak: Pelosi a 'success,' Bush and staff 'irrelevant'

Week of January 24, 2007

by Robert Novak
Posted Jan 24, 2007

January 24, 2007
Washington, DC
Vol. 42, No. 2b

• Bush delivers lack-luster State of the Union Address notable for what it did not contain
• GOP in a state of panic over the political atmosphere
• House passes bill to prevent corrupt members from receiving pensions
• Supreme Court plans to review McCain-Feingold again
• Republicans fear Virginia Senate seat could go Democratic in 2008

Outlook

1. The "hundred hours" program of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has been a success beyond all anticipation. The passage of poll-approved measures came with a unanimous Democratic vote and heavy -- in some cases majority -- Republican support. This performance shows the error and futility of Republican expectations that Pelosi as speaker would fall on her face, though they still hope that she will fail now that the set pieces of the "hundred hours" have been completed.
   
   
2. The bump on Pelosi's early road has been her confrontation with Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), the senior member of Congress and chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, by naming a select committee on energy and the environment headed by the ultra-environmentalist Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), far less sympathetic to the automotive industry than Dingell. Pelosi wins this round, but Dingell can be a difficult and tenacious foe.
   
   
3. Meanwhile, Republicans are divided and disorganized. Senior Republicans in Congress refer to President George W. Bush and his staff as irrelevant and out of touch. Younger conservative members are going their own way, feeling that neither the White House nor the party's congressional leadership shows the way for the GOP. Republican House aides, even in the leadership, complain that they are so completely shut out of the legislative process they have no idea what will be on the House floor next week.
   
   
4. Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) dismal performance on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday shook a little of his inevitability as the Republican nominee. Conservatives are increasingly moving to the standard of former Massachusetts Republican Gov. Mitt Romney, forgetting his liberal past. McCain's sudden attacks on Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld while pressing for more troops for Iraq have caused unease among Republicans.
   
   
5. The early unveiling of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-N.Y.) presidential candidacy was clearly forced by the sudden ascension of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), but was pulled off effectively anyway. The consensus among Democrats is that Clinton is a heavy favorite to be nominated, but faces barriers in early primaries and caucuses: Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina (though they soon will be joined by two huge states, California and Florida, where Clinton would have a major advantage).

State of the Union

To appreciate just how difficult President Bush's task would be in delivering a successful State of the Union Address last night, imagine yourself in the unenviable position of Bush's speechwriter.

1. Bush was set to go before a hostile Democratic Congress that is poised to pass a resolution condemning his new Iraq strategy. His approval ratings were at rock-bottom. The American people had stopped buying the idea that Iraq is a central front in the War on Terror. Members of his own party doubted his administration's competence.
   
   
2. To add to the mess, Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), ranking member on the Armed Services Committee, joined the ranks of those repudiating the Iraq strategy. Bush's plan also faces opposition from some senators seeking re-election such as Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), and two others who are running for President, Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.). It remains unclear just how many Republicans will buck Bush when the vote takes place and which of the competing anti-troop-surge resolutions they will back. This Republican rout will come right after the State of the Union -- the last State of the Union address in which President Bush will be taken seriously, since the focus next January will be on the 2008 presidential primaries.
   
   
3. Given all of this, President Bush was facing the most difficult State of the Union Address of his presidency. But he attempted last night to convince Congress and the American people that he is still relevant. It was a tough sell. The basic idea for his speechwriter would probably be to focus on what's going well -- the economy -- and avoid discussions of the Iraq War as much as possible. He could then roll out a series of domestic proposals -- a la Bill Clinton -- and put up a smokescreen to avoid the issues he did not want to discuss.
   
   
4. That was not exactly what Bush did. He spent nearly half of his speech on the War on Terror and still focused on tying Iraq into that conflict. This was also the thrust of the Democratic response delivered by Sen. James Webb (D-Va.), who probably struck a chord with most Americans when he complained of the "mismanagement" of the war. The Democrats' choice of the acerbic Webb for this task suggests once again that there is zero desire for cooperation across party lines on Iraq.
   
   
5. The President faced not only the new majority of Democrats who are feisty and belligerent, but also the new minority of congressional Republicans who are in a state of panic over the political atmosphere. They did not expect much of a lift from their President, and they did not get one.
   
   
6. President Bush's strategy was to delay any mention of the War on Terror until 23 minutes into a 50-minute speech. That brought him to Iraq, an issue on which he steadily has been losing support. He began the speech with complicated proposals on issues that polls show ordinary citizens care about: energy, health care and education.
   
   
7. These proposals were bureaucratic inventions. They did not stir the lawmakers on either side of the aisle. In the Democratic-controlled Congress, few of the proposals have a practical chance of success, even though the President intended his programs to be "non-confrontational."
   
   
8. When Bush got around to Iraq specifically, it was an anti-climax because of his speech on that crisis a week earlier. This time, he warned of dire consequences of failure and pleaded with Congress for his "new strategy" in Iraq: "I ask you to give it a chance to work." Unsurprisingly, he was able to discuss Iraq without being interrupted by applause.
   
   
9. Bush is not a President capable of reaching oratorical heights, and he did not even try Tuesday night. His speechwriters did not attempt any oratorical stunts, such as his 2002 declaration of war against the "axis of evil."
   
   
10. The President neither made any concessions that might win over a few Democrats nor dwelled upon issues dear to the hearts of his conservative base. The only red-meat conservative issue thrown out by Bush was his very polite scolding of the Senate to conduct up-or-down confirmation votes on his nominees for the federal judiciary. He did pledge a balanced budget and spending control -- issues which led to voter defections from the Republicans in the last election. His health-care plan was exciting only for conservatives extremely well versed in policy -- not exactly the sort of red meat he has thrown out in the past.
    
    
11. Bush's State of the Union was notable for what it did not contain. Having made a calculated decision to save his talk about economic issues for a separate speech next week, Bush mentioned only in passing the need to maintain his tax cuts as the bulwark of the economy. Bush completely ignored the social issues dear to much of his conservative base. He did not mention abortion on the day following the annual "March for Life" on the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision. He did not mention the embryonic research bill that he vetoed last year and is likely to veto again in the new Congress. He made no mention of same-sex marriage.
    
    
12. Although exit polls show corruption was a major issue for voters in the 2006 elections, Bush ignored congressional ethics entirely. The closest he came to this issue was his call to halve the spending created by congressional earmarks -- the first time he had raised that problem.
    
    
13. Social Security reform and tax reform, his two major domestic initiatives announced after his 2004 re-election, made only marginal appearances (though they are likely to come up in his coming economic speech).
    
    
14. It was not a stirring or a memorable State of the Union Address. Everybody seemed happy to get it over with. At least it did not cause more trouble for a President sinking in the polls.

Congress

Minimum Wage: Senate Democratic leaders lack votes for the kind of "clean" minimum wage bill that passed the House earlier this month. Republicans have consistently demanded that any increase in the minimum wage must be paired with small-business tax breaks to offset the damage such a provision would do. An increase in the minimum wage could be especially damaging to small businesses in areas of the country with low costs of living.

Senate Republicans appear to have the votes to force their small-business relief provisions in the final bill, resulting in the same compromise bill they proposed in the 109th Congress, or something similar.

The expected outcome from a conference committee would be a gradual minimum wage increase, coupled with a modest ($8.3 billion) small-business tax break. But House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) is reportedly prepared to block such a bill from going to conference. Under the new Pay-Go rules they just imposed, Democrats cannot pass such a tax cut without cutting spending.

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) proposed a line-item veto amendment to the minimum wage bill. Other Republican amendments, not really related to the minimum wage issue, could further muddy the waters on the bill, but none of them will likely be included in the final bill. Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) brought up an amendment he presents frequently to abolish taxes on Social Security benefits. There are more than 70 amendments pending at this writing, meaning that the minimum wage will be on the Senate floor until next week.

Congressional Pensions: The House passed a bill Monday that would prevent corrupt members of Congress from receiving their congressional pensions. The House had passed a similar bill last year, but this year's passage became a bit of a circus when Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald (D-Calif.) accused Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) of being "disingenuous," resulting in her words' being "taken down" or (at least at first) referred for censure.

Democrats had pulled the pension bill last Friday, but when members returned on Monday, the bill had been changed so that it would not take effect until 2009. Democrats claimed that there was a 27th Amendment Issue -- namely, that the bill changes member compensation and therefore cannot apply until the next Congress. That issue had never come up at any point during the debate in the past.

By the time Democrats made it to the floor, they were still making changes to the offenses that could disqualify a member from receiving a pension. Freshman Rep. Nancy Boyda (D-Kan.), officially the bill's sponsor, sat by as Democratic leaders scribbled last-second changes to the bill right in front of her.

McCain-Feingold: Not enough attention is being paid to the fact that key provisions of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill could be overturned within months. The newly composed Supreme Court will hear some of the issues in the form of the Wisconsin Right to Life case. At issue are the restrictions on mentioning a candidate's name in television and radio advertising 30 days before a primary election and 60 days before a general election.

The provision, one of the more absurd consequences of the campaign finance reform craze of 2002, bars any mention of a candidate's name or the broadcast of his image except by an FEC-regulated political committee. Groups such as Wisconsin Right to Life are barred from buying ads mentioning them.

In this case, the group wanted to air ads in 2004 urging Wisconsinites to contact their senators -- Democrats Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl -- to tell them to support judicial confirmations. But Feingold was up for re-election, therefore campaign law shielded him from being mentioned on television by any group that does not follow FEC regulations for gathering contributions and filing disclosure forms. The last time the Supreme Court considered the McCain-Feingold law, they ruled 5-4 upholding the advertising provisions. Now that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has been replaced by the conservative Samuel Alito, the landmark legislation may be in danger of reversal. The consequences could be enormous in the 2008 election cycle.

Senate 2008

Virginia: Mutual fear and distrust between conservatives and moderates rules the day as this race approaches. Sen. John Warner has said he will run for re-election, in which case he is safe. But moderates fear that Warner could be squeezed between a conservative candidate and a Democrat -- which is unlikely. Conservatives, meanwhile, are not inclined to believe Warner's re-election intentions. They fear that Warner will wait until the deadline, and then step aside for a fellow moderate, such as Rep. Tom Davis (R). They are considering the possibility of putting a serious conservative into the race who would be ready to drop out if Warner remains in the race beyond the filing deadline.

It is difficult to imagine any of the stronger conservative candidates, such as Rep. Eric Cantor (R) or Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R), agreeing to such a scheme. If former Gov. Jim Gilmore leaves the presidential race in time, he could put himself forth as well. But the situation is such that the Virginia GOP is ruled by distrust, having been stung by repeated election losses in key statewide races.

Sincerely,

Robert D. Novak

Mr. Novak is a syndicated columnist and editor of the Evans-Novak Political Report, a political newsletter he founded in 1967 with Rowland Evans. Click here to get a free subscription.

by Robert Novak

New Senate leader's shortened recesses could cut off Bush judicial nominees

December 3, 2006

BY ROBERT NOVAK Sun-Times Columnist
Sen. Harry Reid, leading the Senate's new Democratic majority, is framing next year's schedule in a way that will make it difficult, if not impossible, for President Bush to give recess appointments to nominees blocked for confirmation.

Reid's schedule limits Senate recesses to one week. Recess appointments usually are made only when Congress has been out of session for at least 10 days. That may kill any consideration of trying to seat federal appeals court judges whose nominations had been stalled even in the Republican-controlled Senate. The downside may be a rebellion by senators if their breaks are held to one week.

A footnote: Bush did not make his difficult course in the Senate any easier when he inexplicably failed to place a congratulatory phone call to Sen. Mitch McConnell on his election as Senate Republican leader. The president did call the new minority whip, Sen. Trent Lott. After McConnell revealed the presidential snub in an interview, Bush called him.


Barney's 'lapdog'?
Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts is not content to become chairman of the House Financial Services Committee but is pushing for moderate Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama as its ranking Republican member.
The committee's Democratic staff is pressing for Bachus over the more senior conservative Rep. Richard Baker of Louisiana (with the selection made this coming week by the Republican Steering Committee) on grounds he would facilitate bipartisan cooperation with Frank. Baker's supporters claim Bachus would be Frank's ''lapdog'' on the important committee, which deals with corporate regulation.

According to the National Journal's ratings for the last Congress, Baker is the 17th most conservative House member while Bachus ranks 78th. Baker is more conservative than every member of the House GOP leadership (except for Rep. John Carter of Texas, the newly elected secretary of the Conference).

Baker is also measured to the right of all leaders of the conservative Republican Study Committee.


Keating for president?
Former Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating, in a recent lunch with veteran Republican political consultant Ed Rollins, explored the prospects of his making a run for president. Rollins replied that he should run only if he could raise a sufficient war chest.
Keating, the chief Washington-based lobbyist for the life insurance industry, considered a 2000 race for president with Rollins as his manager. He has made no decision for 2008. Rollins managed President Reagan's landslide re-election in 1984.

The rationale for Keating's presidential ambitions is the absence of a clear and viable right-of-center presidential candidate now that Sen. George Allen has been eliminated by his defeat for re-election in Virginia. Keating is a conservative and a prominent Catholic layman who at one time was a prospect to be George W. Bush's running mate in 2000.


Divided conservatives
While the conservative Republican Study Committee will have an increased percentage in the GOP's depleted House ranks, it is being divided in a battle for its leadership between reformers and appropriators.
Third-term Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, a reformer opposing earmarks, was in line to be the next chairman. But he is being challenged by Rep. Todd Tiahrt of Kansas, a sixth-termer on the Appropriations Committee.

Tiahrt's candidacy riles reformers who want to make the study committee the base for controlling spending and growth of government. After the election, the committee's share of all House Republicans has climbed from 43 percent to as high as 54 percent. Hensarling's backers complain that Tiahrt's challenge dilutes the impact of conservatives.


Emily down
In an election marked by widespread Republican defeats, the group that supports female Democratic candidates who are pro-choice on abortion picked up just two of 19 Republican House seats it had targeted for defeat.
In those 19 districts, Emily's List spent $1.5 million in independent expenditures and made $921,000 in direct contributions. It funneled $241,357 to Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth in Illinois and $159,000 to state Atty. Gen Patricia Madrid in New Mexico. Duckworth and Madrid, both narrow losers, were among the highest-profile Dem challengers this year.

In Democratic House primaries, Emily's List lost four out of six competitive races.

Novak: Republicans Have Had Enough of Iraq

Bush's Shrinking Options

By Robert D. Novak
Monday, December 4, 2006; A19

George W. Bush passed through seven time zones from Amman, Jordan, on Thursday to land in Washington at 4 p.m., resting briefly before embarking on the annual round of White House Christmas parties. The nightly six-hour chore of handshaking and posing for photos was followed by sitting through the endless annual honors presentation at the Kennedy Center on Sunday night. This regimen, for a president who likes to fine-tune and limit his schedule, fits his loss of control over Iraq.

The notion bruited about Washington that James A. Baker is a deus ex machina imposed by President Bush to resolve the entangled Iraqi plot is nonsense. The Iraq Study Group, co-chaired by former secretary of state Baker and former representative Lee Hamilton, is out of the White House sphere of influence. The White House certainly did not ask Congress for help by creating this commission. Baker has made sure that the report, though leaked in part to the press, has not gone to the White House.

As a creature of Congress (an institution that Bush dislikes), Baker's group spells trouble for Bush when it releases its report Wednesday. It will propose, however muted its tone, gradual withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Iraq before the president is ready for it. The hope is that Baker will nuance the report's words sufficiently and hedge calls for withdrawal in such a way that Bush can say that is what he has been doing anyway.

Bush has not stepped back from the decisions he has made on Iraq. At the core of Bush's Iraq dilemma is the fact, still denied at the White House, that the president has lost his political base on the overriding issue of the war. In contact mainly with fawning campaign contributors, Bush may not appreciate the steady decline in support of his war policy that I have seen deepening among Republicans in the past year.

This undercurrent of GOP protest roared to the surface with the party's election debacle Nov. 7. At the Republican grass roots, there is no question that Iraq lost the election. State officials and party leaders who are no specialists on foreign policy tell me the Republican Party simply cannot go into the 2008 campaign with troops still fighting in Iraq.

As a lame-duck president, Bush seems oblivious to the grass-roots sentiment that will be seconded in part by the Baker-Hamilton recommendations. Baker clearly is not doing the president's bidding. On the contrary, Bush aides have suggested that two forthcoming government reports on Iraq (especially one by the Pentagon) are more important than Baker's and should be given more attention.

The president's position is difficult. He does not want to be seen as ignoring a congressional study group. But he has not yet reached the point of accepting unconditional troop withdrawal. If he seems to differ from Baker-Hamilton recommendations, he can expect heavy scolding by the group's members on television.

Increasingly, Republicans on Capitol Hill see no viable alternative to combat troop withdrawal. While Bush's plight is compared to Abraham Lincoln's after his mid-term elections, there is no capture of Atlanta to guarantee an ultimate military victory. This is not that kind of war.

If not able to secure an Atlanta-style victory, could Bush stabilize the situation in Iraq by sending in more troops? Sen. John McCain, the putative front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, once again has gone against the body of opinion in the party by calling for more U.S. troops in Iraq. Sen. Chuck Hagel, second-ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a McCain supporter in 2000, wrote in The Post on Nov. 26: "The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq."

Bush agrees with that, but not with Hagel's call for a phased troop withdrawal likely to be included in a Baker-Hamilton group recommendation. Hagel sees the report as a last chance to avert "impending disaster in Iraq." While its release is anticipated at the White House as no less annoying than sitting through the Kennedy Center honors, the president faces an opportunity as well as a dilemma.

? 2006 Creators Syndicate Inc.