Justin's Thursday Political News 08.16.07

Posted by Justin Baragona on 08.16.2007

Rove quits on Bush, Hastert quits on Congress, the American people want to quit on both the President and Congress, and Romney and Giuliani try to show they are tough on illegal immigration.

Welcome to another edition of Justin's Thursday Political News. Right now, I am sweltering in yet another of the seemingly endless 100+ degree summer days in St. Louis. Worse yet, I tried playing golf a couple days ago in this heat….huge mistake! It doesn't matter how early you try to start in the day, the heat will catch up with you. Before the heat fries the last remaining active brain cell I have, I better hurry up and get to the news.


Author Wayne Slater, who wrote the book 'The Architect' about Karl Rove, made this comment after Rove announced his resignation:


"All lame ducks are lame ducks; this one, with Karl Rove now turning out the lights, is the most lame duck we've seen in a long time."



Well, I'm not going to discuss this too much as Jason Easley covered this story in great detail in his Tuesday column. However, I do want to go over what some people on both sides of the aisle have been saying since Rove's announcement. Slater feels that the Bush presidency is absolutely over now. On the flip side, GOP strategist Bill Bennett is saying that Rove leaving is now big deal. He stated that Rove's departure could hurt him on the domestic front, but that's about it. In his other duties as president, Bush will just have to rely on others to help him. Bennett did have some glowing words to say about Rove, stating that he was probably the most influential presidential aide in history, and besides being a great strategist, he was also a very good at policy.

Democratic strategist Stephanie Cutter feels that Rove's biggest downfall is that he tried to run the White House like it was constant campaign. I agree with this assessment. Rove knew how to get Bush to the White House, but didn't know what to do once he got him there. Once you are President, you don't need to win the election anymore. You need to actually govern and make decisions and adapt to the situation at hand. Rove knows attack politics, but it appears that is all he knows. He is ruthless and can help someone win elections if they are willing to get rid of their conscience. However, that same ruthlessness can backfire when you are in office, especially when you keep that person on to help make policy decisions. Bush became very unpopular over these past couple of years, and Rove knew that he was going to be unable to change that, because much of Bush's unpopularity was tied directly to Rove.

Rove is staring at a subpoena from the Senate regarding the attorney firing scandal and his name popped up quite a bit in the Valerie Plame investigation. With Bush having only one and a half years left in office and his popularity dipping daily, Rove saw the writing on the wall that he needed to jump ship, especially when Chief of Staff Josh Bolten stated that if anyone that was still on staff come Labor Day was expected to stay on until the end of term. Rove decided to leave instead of committing to the end, thus basically abandoning the man he has been serving consistently since he became Governor of Texas in 1993. The big question now is if Rove is going to help any other GOP campaigns out there, specifically Giuliani's. While some analysts feel that Rove will try to keep a low profile, I have the feeling that this is one of the big reasons why Rove is cutting and running from the Bush Administration. Giuliani offers the same kind of opportunity to Rove that Bush did in 2000. His campaign has already raised a bunch of money and he is, at the moment, the frontrunner. However, he has been made to look like a fool at times in debates and on the campaign trail and he has seen his lead in the polls dwindle since he first entered the race. Look for Rove to join this campaign sooner rather than later.



Doug Thornell, spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said this after former Speaker of the House Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) announced he would resign at the end of his term:


"Any Republican running will have to answer for their party's failure to be nothing more than a rubber stamp for George Bush's endless war in Iraq and his irresponsible fiscal policies."



The only thing really shocking about this is that he hasn't resigned already and that he is going to run out his term. Usually, when someone loses the speakership, they tend to get out of office altogether. Newt Gingrich, who preceded Hastert, stepped down as Speaker after he had to endure a scandal and then resigned shortly afterwards. Prior to Gingrich, Democrat Tom Foley was unable to keep his House seat during the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994. Foley predecessor, Rep. Jim Wright (D-TX), resigned both his speakership and seat in 1989. Hastert didn't want to be the House Minority Leader when the Democrats took over Congress last year, but had already won his election to retain his seat, so he decided to stay on. With Hastert not running, both parties are gearing up to try to win his seat in next year's election, as it comes into play for the first time in over 20 years. The Democrats will use Hastert's hardcore support for the Iraq War and Bush's tax cuts against the GOP to try to grab another seat, and the Republicans will have to decide if they want to use Hastert's name and reputation or go for someone a bit more moderate and distance themselves from him.



Mitt Romney tried to talk tough about illegal immigration and directed this statement at fellow Presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani:


"New York City was the poster child for sanctuary cities in the country."



Well, it appears that THE hot button issue for the Republicans going into the 2008 election is illegal immigration, and now every candidate is falling over themselves trying to prove that they are indeed tough on immigration. This is especially true with these two leading candidates. Both of them have had their records brought up regarding this issue and are being accused of being soft. Knowing that this can turn into a big issue the closer election time comes, both candidates are deflecting their own records and pointing out what they perceive to be bigger deficiencies in the other candidate. While Romney called New York a sanctuary city when Giuliani was mayor, Rudy retaliated by stating that Massachusetts had three sanctuary cities (Cambridge, Orleans and Somerville) and Romney did nothing about them while governor. If you don't know, a sanctuary city is where a city doesn't require its employees to report illegal immigrants to the feds.

Both of these candidates have come under fire from members of their own party for their stance on illegal immigration or matters dealing with it. Romney had to deal with a story that he hired a lawn care company that employed several illegal immigrants. Giuliani has had to deal with statements he made while mayor of New York that seemed to indicate that he was not opposed to illegal immigration. He made this statement in 1994: "If you come here, and you work hard, and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city." He also said this in 1996: "What's the best thing to do about that?" Put them in a situation in which they keep children out of school? Put them in a situation in which they don't go to hospitals? Or put them in a situation in which they don't report crimes to the police?" On top of that, both Romney and Giuliani spoke favorably of the Bush immigration bill from 2006 that gave illegal immigrants amnesty and a chance to be citizens. However, they both made sure to show opposition to pretty much the same bill this year. We'll see how this continues to play out and if this will hurt either of these two with the hardline conservatives come primary time.




Regarding a recent poll from CNN showing poor results for both Congress and the president, Polling Director Keating Holland had this to say:


"The public clearly doesn't like what it sees coming out of Washington these days."



The CNN poll that was released Wednesday showed that 57% of respondents feel that Bush's presidency has been a failure. At the same time, 55% feel that Congress, with Democrats in the majority, has also been a failure. I think the main issue at foot here is the war. Americans decided to elect Democrats to Congress because they are fed up with the war and wanted the Dems to hold Bush accountable and, quite frankly, do something about it. However, Congress was unable to get anything passed other than a timetable bill for withdrawal, and then it seemed that they backed off from the President when he vetoed the bill. This appears to be the main issue the public has with Congress, as the Democrats have been able to get some other key issues addressed, such as a raise in minimum wage. They are also working on an increase in health insurance for underprivileged children.

The poll also showed that despite dissatisfaction with Congress so far, people still trust them more than they trust the President. Democrats won by a 48 to 35 margin when respondents were asked who they had more confidence in to deal with major issues in the country. However, that still shows less than 50 percent for Democrats, so they shouldn't feel that good about themselves. The President found that very few people agree with him on the issues facing the country. 35 percent stated that they agree with Bush on issues that matter the most to them. Something to point out is that Bush's unpopularity seems to stem mainly from that, as the poll showed 46% stating that they have a positive view of Bush personally or regarding his leadership skills. Of course, this would state that more than 50% do not view him personally in a positive light, but you take what you can get, right?




Well, that's going to do it for me today. No specific column that I'll steer you to this week for no other reason than me being tired and lazy. I'll see you next week with more news in the realm of politics.