Race Dead Even: Weldon's Phony Poll... Dead in Water

Today's Daily News, Poll: Tight Race in 7th District, has the results of the Keystone Poll from Franklin and Marshall.

Democratic upstart Sestak was leading Weldon by a single point, 45 percent to 44 percent, among likely voters, and 44 percent to 43 percent among all registered voters, the survey found.
The difference between the candidates was well within the survey's four-point margin of error, meaning that the results could easily flip if a different group of voters were surveyed.

Why this is more reliable than the phony 19-poll result touted by Weldon:

1. Poll was conducted more recently (this past weekend, so about two weeks "fresher" than Weldon poll)
   
2. Public has more information about the Iraq War and the further debunking of Able Danger by the Pentagon upon which to base a decision.
   
3. Poll NOT was conducted or paid for by either campaign.
   

This poses quite dilemma for the Weldon campaign's next move:
A) If they stand by the 19-point poll, they have to explain a 20-point turn around.
B) If they release the REAL polling results they got two weeks (which would show the race within margin of error or the poll to be push poll), they've got to explain why they pretended it was 19-points.

Correct Answer: (C) Deny, spin and lie.

1. They will denounce the poll.
   
2. They'll claim that Franklin & Marshall is a liberal bastion and/or conducted a flawed poll.
   
3. They'll claim to have superior (and of course, secret) internal polling data that contradicts the poll.
   
4. They'll claim that Curt is running hard and their GOTV operation will make the poll irrelevant.
   
5. They'll claim to have some info (i.e. dirt) on Sestak, that when revealed, will change voters minds.
   
6. They'll claim is it still a long way to Nov 7th, and a lot can happen.
   
7. Finally, they will claim that "The voters of the 7th know Curt and his record of independently fighting for them. Blah. Blah. Blah."

For the "Anonymous" Weldon campaign staffers that post here, save yourselves some typing and just respond with either: Answer C or (if you want to be specific) C.1, C.2, ... C.6

Thanks for playing.

Bill Clinton for Joe Sestak, Oct 5

Normally we would let the Sestak campaign do their own marketing, but I thought this was a pretty good event will Bill in town, fresh off his fiery lambasting of Chris Wallace of Faux News.

===========================
Former Vice Admiral Joe Sestak
U.S. Congressional Candidate, PA-7
with
Special Guest
Former President Bill Clinton

Thursday, October 5
1:00 - 3:00 pm Time change: 12 noon to 2:00 pm
Valley Forge Military Academy and College
Mellon Hall
1001 Eagle Road, Wayne, PA 19087

Joe served as President Clinton's Director for Defense Policy on the National Security Council staff at the White House, where he was responsible for national security and defense strategy, policy and programs, while providing political-military advice.
Reserve Early - Limited Space Available

Please RSVP to Elizabeth Sestak at:
clintonevent@sestakforcongress.com or call 610-891-8956

Download a printable version of this the flyer:

http://sestakforcongress.com/media/pdf/PresClintonInvite.pdf

Weldon is getting desperate

Curt Weldon is privately calling in every favor he has ever earned from anybody. Rumor has it that he overdid his "I am independent of Pres. Bush" and that the national repubs have tossed him out the window of the train. Too bad because his efforts to distance himself from the President were useless anyway.

Weldon has only the money from the Military Industrial Complex now. Oh, yeah, and the Delco Repubs are still backing him because they have to.

Weldon's Denial Deepens After NIE Report

After the leak of the major conclusion by the press that Iraq War is spreading terrorism more rapidly, the White House declassified and released the key judgements of the April 2006 National Intelligence Estimate.

The NIE report is the concensus opinion of 16 US intelligence agencies. The most critical finding is that the War in Iraq has become a rallying point for radical forces. Specifically..

We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.
The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should jihadist leaving Iraq perceive themselves, or be perceived, to have failed, we feel that fewer fighers will be inspired to carry on the fight.
We assess that that the underlying factors fueling the spread of of the movement outweigh its vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this Estimate.

In William Bender's piece in the Delco Times:
Weldon "said he has not read the report but expects to receive a briefing today."
Translation: every informed person has already read the declassified conclusions, but Weldon not only has not read the report, but is going to get a briefing on it (someone is going to read it for him, and give him the Cliff Note's version).
Even more likely, the only real briefing will be by the RNC with talking points cherry picked from the report.

The released report is only a few pages. It is from almost 6 months ago (when things were going better than today), and it states what was obvious to the Democrats over a year ago, and what the Bush administration has been denying every day. Weldon is so misinformed on the relevant issues that he was quoted as saying:

"Do we have problems with terrorists? Absolutely. [um... DUH!] Do I think it’s because of Iraq? Absolutely not,[huh??]" Weldon said, citing the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 and USS Cole in 2000.

Question for Clueless Curt: Was Iraq involved in WTC in 1993, or USS Cole in 2000, or attacks on 9/11/2001? ABSOLUTELY NOT. So why are you citing the unrelated existence of previous terrorism with the rapid fueling of new terrorism by the failed policies destablizing Iraq and the Mid-East.

Weldon also repeats the false argument that the lack of a successful attack inside the US since 9/11 is proof that we've been protected by current policies. This is like selling someone in Florida a magic necklace that keeps away polar bears, and offering a proof the lack of polar bears in your vicinity. Every time the US detains and tortures an innocent person due to unconstitutional policies, the terrorists score a successful attack on the very freedoms we claim to be preserving.

Tom Ridge, saddled with the job of helping Weldon's campaign, provided more of the same insight we got from his color-coded alerts, as he wallowed in ignorance:

Ridge hadn’t seen the intelligence report, either, but was skeptical of its findings. "I don’t think I buy the thesis. I don’t believe it’s created jihadists," he said.

Tom, do you think it created an overwhelming movement of Iraqis greeting us with flowers as liberators, while peace and democracy spread across the Mid-East?

The point is this: Bush and Weldon have been falsely claiming that Iraq is making us safer. Bush, as the recipient of the NIE, has know this for 6 months, yet he has been making mid-term elections speeches that claim the opposite. Weldon is marching to the beat.

The only thing, Weldon is independent of, is reality.

Another Blow to Able Danger Fantasy

My Caption: "I nearly caught a terrorist, and he was thiissss big."

From Yahoo News, Pentagon: Secret Unit Couldn't Stop 9/11

Another nail in the coffin for Weldon and Able Danger:

A Pentagon report rejects the idea that intelligence gathered by a secret military unit could have been used to stop the Sept. 11 hijackings.
The Pentagon inspector general's office said Thursday that a review of records from the unit, known as Able Danger, found no evidence it had identified ringleader Mohamed Atta or any other terrorist who participated in the 2001 attacks.

The report was ordered in response to Weldon's wild claims and rants that the Able Danger unit had identified Atta prior to Sept 11th, 2001.

This is on top of last year's previous findings on the same issue:

Last year, the bipartisan commission that investigated the attacks dispensed with the issue by calling it "not historically significant."
Thomas Kean, the commission's co-chairman, said he hoped the report would put an end to discussion about Able Danger. "After this I don't know where it can go," Kean said.

In his continued refusal to accept reality over paranoia, "Weldon questioned the 'motives and the content' of the report and rejected its conclusions".

Weldon seems to have his own 5 stages of Denial:
1)Denial 2)Denial 3)Paranoia 4)Denial 5)Rinse and Repeat

Weldon claims the Pentagon cherry-picked testimony and trashed the reputations of witnesses, but "the report said those accounts 'varied significantly' and witnesses were inconsistent at times in their statements".

Much of Weldon's dubious claim revolves around a supposed chart that identified Atta pre-9/11, but then magically disappeared in some government conspiracy, so Weldon can't produce it or a single reliable witness. Weldon is engaging in his own version of The conspiracy dog ate my congressional homework.

William Bender, in his Delco Times piece, Report: Curt wrong about Able Danger, expands on the story and reveals more of Weldon's paranoia.

The 9/11 Commission has previously dismissed Weldon’s claims, which led the congressman to ratchet up his accusations that commission members and staffers conspired to exclude the Able Danger findings from their final report to shield the Clinton administration from embarrassment.
"This is a scandal, I think, bigger than Watergate," Weldon told the Daily Times in December.

So, Weldon believes that the Bush administration is engaged in a giant conspiracy, bigger than Watergate, just to protect Clinton from embarassment?? I think that it's time for Congress to begin mandatory drug testing of its members.

Weldon further questioned the timing of the release of this latest report, implying that it might be an attempt to influence the elections. Curt's the one that demanded this second investigation, when he rejected last year's conclusions on the same subject.


Curt:
How many more of our tax dollars are you going to waste pursuing your desperate fantasies and even more desperate bid for re-election?

Can you stop embarassing yourself and the 7th district for a few days?

Is your next "evidence" going to be a phone-book with Atta's name?

The 20 Most Corrupt in Congress: Weldon Makes the List!

There never seems to be enough money to help the handicapped... unless, of course, it is the ethically handicapped.

Our own poster boys for what wrong's in Washington, Curt Weldon and Rick Santorum, have made the list of The 20 Most Corrupt Members of Congress.

The group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), has just released it's lastest list.
The Report Detailing Weldon's abuses can be read at BeyondDelay.org

The list contained three senators: Conrad Burns (R-MT), Bill Frist (R-TN) and Rick Santorum (R-PA).

Joining Weldon on the list of the corrupt House Members: Roy Blunt (R-MO), Pete Sessions (R-TX) and Katherine Harris (R-FL).

It's hardly surprising that the most corrupt GOP political machine in Pennsylvania has Weldon as a representative. However, it is long past time for the rest of us to have an ethical representative.

The Delco Times picked up on the story: Weldon blasts report labeling him corrupt (A more accurate title would have been: Weldon dodges issue by dimissing the source as partisan.)

The CREW report details the extraordinary financial good fortune Weldon's three kids and close friends have received from companies that are Weldon's top political contributors, and recipients of Weldon's legislative support. Unsurprisingly, "Pay-to-Play" Puppio found "nothing illegal or improper about any of the actions mentioned". I guess admitting it was wrong would be like giving up your Fifth Admendment rights against self-incrimination.
Walks like a duck. Talks like a duck. Smells like a duck's droppings.

Weldon and Santorum are stains on the 7th District and all of Pennsylvania. It's a mess that only the voters can clean on Nov. 7th.

Vote in Delco Times Poll!

In yesterday's article in the Delaware County Daily Times, Bill Bender calls this PA-7 race a "streetfight" and pledges to step up his coverage of the race. We look forward to what his upbcoming chronicles of this contest.

Bender is also conducting an informal poll via email. All you have to do is click here to send an email to Bender (wbender@delcotimes.com) with Sestak in the subject line (all set up for you!)

The hundreds of people who visit this site daily should have an impact on Bender's poll and on Nov. 7!

House colleague calls Weldon "slightly unhinged" - Time

In a compelling piece in Time, Sept 17, 2006, Joe Klein tracks the PA-7 race and talks about the characteristics of Joe Sestak and Curt Weldon. Pretty good article

This part jumps out:

"Curt can be absolutely brilliant," says a House colleague. "But there's also a slightly unhinged quality to him." Weldon recently insisted, along with Pennsylvania's U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, that there were still weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He also claimed that a secret Pentagon unit called Able Danger had identified Mohamed Atta at the center of the 9/11 terrorist conspiracy a year before the attacks, a claim that has been dismissed by both the White House and the 9/11 commission. Weldon has been associated with some questionable lobbying schemes: both his daughter Karen and his real estate agent, a longtime friend named Cecelia Grimes, have set up lobbying firms representing defense contractors and East European companies that have received Weldon's support for their products.

"Unhinged"? That's putting it mildly!
"questionable lobbying schemes"? The only question is why the Republican controlled House failed to investigate these incidents. But I guess that question answers itself.

Joe's ads hit the airwaves

In case you haven't caught the first major Sestak TV ad, you can view it online:

It's hard to convey a lot in thirty seconds, but the ad uses every second well. It communicates the key points of his bio, makes it clear that Sestak is opposed to Bush's approach in Iraq, and identifies himself as a change candidate--and a Democrat.

That last point is critical. In years past, Democratic candidates in the heavily Republican suburbs would have been tempted to play down party affiliation. But now that the region has become far more balanced, and in light of the tarnished image of the Bush administration and the Republican congress, the name "Democrat" has new life.

It signals to existing Democrats that the party is mounting a serious candidate with a fantastic background of public service. It demonstrates to independents that our party is ready to put up a fight against a one-party government that has gone too far. And it makes it clear to disappointed, ticket-splitting Republicans--of which there are many--that they have a viable outlet to express their upset with the path of their own party.

It's OUR Economy...and we can do better!

Recent and ongoing economic data has shown that while the rich get richer, the average American is losing ground.
There are many sources that support this; here are just a few::
The Economist, June 15, 2006
Washington Monthly, Sept 7, 2006

Recently Joe Sestak released his plan for middle class tax relief.
Take a look at his press release and the Delco Times article about it.

With Weldon and Bush passing tax cuts for the wealthy and driving up the national debt with a deficit budget and a costly war, it's refreshing to see and hear about a plan that affects middle America positively. Trickle down economics doesn't work and never worked. Sestak has better ideas on OUR economy and we need him and 15 or more new Democrats in the US Congress to understand that and do better us.

Curt Weldon: Unbound

The Times Herald has an article about how Republicans like Weldon, "desperate to hold onto his seat", are talking about time tables in Iraq.

Weldon, with 10 two-year terms behind him in the House, is preparing to submit a nonbinding resolution that would say Bush should take a troop-return approach based on success milestones under criteria determined by military officers.

A nonbinding resolution? Gee, Curt, what a chicken-sh*t hawk move that is.

1. A nonbinding resolution is the Congressional equivalent of taking your sister to the prom. This can only fool people that don't know your sister and aren't suspicious about the lack of dancing and kissing.
   This is a strickly "for show" move by Weldon that has no actual effect whether it passes or not.
   
   
2. Is Curt really going to trust the pull-out decision to military commanders that have stopped wasting their time looking for the WMDs that Weldon still thinks are there?
   Curt, don't cut-and-run from your WMD fantasies! Change your resolution to prevent the troops from pulling out until they find Saddam's non-existence WMD arsenal.
   
   
3. For the past 3 years of the war in Iraq, Bush and Rumsfeld have ignored military requests for more troops. They have disengenuously claimed that if the commanders ask for more troops, they will get them. In reality, they have made it clear that any commanders that contradict Administration policy by asking for more troops will find a short end to their careers.
   So, even if Weldon's resolution was put into effect, Bush and Rummy still hold the careers of the commanders by the short-hairs.
   
   
4. If this were actually a real bill, does Weldon think that a President who overreaches his Constitution authority would sign something that took away his control over his supposed strategy in Iraq?
   I think we need a bill requiring authors of pin-head resolutions like this to pass a drug test first.
   

And the Weldon campaign response:

Weldon's press secretary said his proposal goes beyond that and depoliticizes the timing for withdrawals by placing it in the hands of military commanders.
"This calls on the president to be more clear about something that's already being done. This calls on the president to explain more clearly to the American people something that constituents in the congressman's district and people and citizens across the country have been talking about. That is, what is our plan? When will this end?" said John Tomaszewski, the press secretary.

- It politicizes it more by making it for show instead of a real bill.
- Weldon has criticized the opinion of military Veterans like Joe Sestak and John Murtha when they talk about when to pull out troops. So, which is it Curt: do you want or not want the opinion of those that have served?
- How does this call for the President to be more clear? Doesn't it merely attempt to shift the responsibilty from the President who proudly caused the problems?
- Um, the reason that the constituents in the congressman's district are talking about it is because Setak is talking about it and the voters agree with Sestak.
- "That is, what is our plan? When will this end?" Gee, Curt, maybe these are questions Congress should be asking Rumsfeld UNDER OATH!!

I guess we'll have to wait until Dems control congress to get some answers.

My prediction: Weldon's "Resolution for the Unbound" will go over like a lead balloon.

Two items in the Delco Times

Bill Bender pulls double duty this weekend on the congressional race:

First, "Union Backing Could Be Key for Sestak in November," which covered the unanimous endorsement on Thursday by the Pennsylvania division of the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW).

At Thursday’s rally, at a United Steelworkers hall, members were clearly angry at the incumbent and ready to go to work for Sestak, who pledged to fight for universal health care, an increase in the minimum wage and others issues important to organized labor.

"We need to take back America, take it back from the corporate interests, take it back from the George W. Bush’s, the Dick Cheney’s, the Rick Santorum’s and the Curt Weldon’s," shouted John Meyerson, political director of UFCW Local 1776. "We need to return power in this country to working families."

On the same day, Bender did a piece on Curt's unconstitutional scheme for subverting civilian control of the military. [Note the Times editor, though, calling Weldon's proposal a "pullout plan" is too generous. Curt's stunt is neither a pullout or a plan. Discuss amongst yourselves.]

"I support what we’re doing and I support the president," Weldon said. "This is not me running away from President Bush."

Sestak isn’t buying it, saying Weldon is "trying to wash his hands" of the war. The Democrat has repeatedly criticized the congressman’s position on the war and is calling for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops by the end of next year.

"This is just an attempt to pass the buck to the military, which brings no guarantee that our troops will leave Iraq for years to come," Sestak said.

Like our military brass really needs to waste time coming into committee hearings to testify as to why this legislation is a monumentally bad idea.

Weldon's terrorists "in the supermarkets"

A week or so ago Bush gave some speeches about the continuing threats of terrorism and the US efforts to combat these threats.

Curt Weldon, in typical style, went a little overboard in his fear-mongering. In response, Weldon was quoted as saying:

“We either fight them there, or we fight them in the supermarkets and streets here.”

Maybe Weldon got a new hot tip from his buddy "Ali" that Superfresh, Acme, Pathmark, or Genuardi's was next on the terrorists' list.

So be aware on your next shopping trip that you might see Weldon or his staffers scurrying around in your local supermarkets yelling things like:
"Islamic Fascist in Aisle 4!!!!"
"Terrorists in the cleaning products aisle, next to the blue light special on paper towels!!!"

News Analyst Craig Crawford, who penned the article, ends with:

After all, if Bush could not keep the terrorists out of Iraq, how can he keep them out of the local supermarket?

Running scared, Weldon proposes unconstitutional Iraq plan

Alex Bolton, for The Hill, reports that Curt Weldon has come up with a new scheme for distancing himself from the President while still remaining adamently in favor of a continuing, open-ended military engagement in Iraq.

The second-ranking Republican...has drafted a resolution that would give military commanders — instead of President Bush or Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld — decision-making authority over when American troops should return home.

I immediately jumped out of my seat. Civilian control of the military is a cornerstone of American democracy. The President is commander-in-chief.

Do you remember how rabid the Weldon clan was when Sestak appeared in uniform at a memorial service? I heard people raising the rediculous specter of South American banana republics where generals called the shots. And yet Weldon wants to actually flout the constitution and give the President's inherent powers over to military leaders.

But don't take it from this member of the loyal opposition.

Here's the response from uber-hawk Republican Senator Richard Lugar:

Constitutionally, the president is the commander-in-chief. I don't see a good reason to separate the chain of command from the president. I appreciate what Curt is trying to do, but it's not a good idea.

Or how about Senator Graham (R-SC):

Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), a Republican on the Armed Services panel, said that empowering generals with such decisionmaking authority risked "doing away with civilian control of the military." "It would subvert civilian leadership of the military," he said.

Can Curt Weldon possibly be this short-sighted and uninformed? (Even I'm surprised.) Is he going to give this issue to Sestak on a silver platter, who can succinctly explain why it is terrible, disastrous policy to give military leaders decisions to make that have far-reaching political and civic implications?

Sestak's response:

As someone who served in the military for 31 years, this latest proposal from Curt Weldon, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, shows his profound ignorance on military issues and American history. Curt Weldon ought to go back and read the Constitution. Every elementary school child knows the President is the Commander-in-Chief. Curt Weldon has failed to hold President Bush accountable for the mismanagement of the war and has backed Bush’s ‘stay the course’ policy every step of the way. But, now facing a tough election, he’s once again trying to play both sides of the issue just like he has with stem cell research, privatizing social security and increasing the minimum wage. Saying and doing anything to get re-elected is not leadership.

Americans have tremendous faith in their military. But what we need is new civilian leaders, not a discarded constitution.

Secret Prison Denials from Weldon Supporters

One of my recent Internet searches on the Sestak-Weldon race located a crazy right-wing blog/site called "Accuracy in Media" with conspiracy theories about Sestak, Clinton, left-wing inspired one-world-goverments, etc. I think the use of the word accuracy is meant to be ironic.

The Editor of the site is Rush Limbaugh style ranter named Cliff Kincaid (at least he's not Anonymous). Anyway, just two days ago, on Sept 4th, he wrote a piece called "Back to Secret Prisons" in which he ridicules the idea of secret prisons and makes some irrelevent distinction between secret prisons and secret detention facilities.

He boasts of how he debunked the Dana Priest story:

We assume, of course, that the U.N. is referring to the Dana Priest story in the Post about the "secret prisons." But we have torn that article to pieces in several columns.

The word "column" is linked to his earlier debunking attempt: Secret Evidence for Secret Prisons? which ends with:

But the basic truth is that the Priest article on "secret prisons," which was published on November 2, 2005, still cannot be confirmed, even after a comprehensive investigation.
It looks like the position of the Post will have to be that evidence for the existence of the secret prisons will just have to remain secret—if it exists at all.
Does this kind of coverage deserve a Pulitzer Prize?

You bet your ass it deserves a Pulitzer!

Of course, this is funny because, today, George Bush publicly acknowledged the existence of those secret facilities. From today's Washington Post:

President Bush today announced the transfer to the Guantanamo Bay naval base of 14 al-Qaeda terrorist suspects previously held by the CIA in a secret detention program..
In defending the CIA detention program, Bush explicitly confirmed its existence publicly for the first time since the covert prison system was revealed by The Washington Post in November 2005.

Back on May 22nd, another wrong-winger on Kincaid's site, Wes Vernon, authored a paranoid fantasy about Weldon, Able Danger, Hillary Clinton, Sestak

If politics motivated McCarthy, could politics have motivated Dana Priest? Priest is the Post reporter who wrote the Pulitzer Prize-winning story on "secret CIA prisons" in Europe but refuses to say whether McCarthy was one of her sources. The Priest story, based completely on anonymous sources, has not been confirmed. [diano: Um, confirmed by President now!]
We do know that Priest authored a vicious attack on Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), a major critic of the intelligence community who supported CIA director Porter Goss's effort to reform the agency and fire leakers to the press.
As we noted in our August-B, 2005 AIM Report, Priest authored the attack on Weldon without contacting the congressman and the paper refused to print a letter to the editor from Weldon rebutting the Priest article.

Mr. Vernon tries to equate the two articles by Priest, attacks the prison article, and by implication tries to cast doubt on any writings against Weldon. Notice the use of "we do know", which is his way of pretending that the case for bias against Weldon is even stronger.

See, that's their tactic. When the facts are against them, attack the reporters and accuse them of being part of some conspiracy. Then act like the existence of a conspiracy is a bigger truth than what the reporters exposed. Deny and distract. Rinse and repeat.

Unfortunately, for Weldon, Santorum and their pal Bush, the reporters are finally waking up and uncovering the truth:

Bush has violated the Geneva Conventions, condoned tortured, circumvented the Constitution and used the 9/11 victims as political props to undermine the very freedoms he claims to protect. His avid partners in this have been Curt Weldon and Rick Santorum with their voices and their votes.

It is time for our voices and our votes.

The Casey Santorum Debate

Yesterday, Bob Casey and Rick Santorum debated each other on Meet the Press.
The entire transcript is available at the MSNBC site.

Why am I posting about the Senate race?
1) This race is expected to drive voter turnout.
2) Weldon is like a mini-me of Santorum with all the positions they share.
3) Turning this country around requires taking back not only the House, but the Senate.

Here a few highlights that should illustrate why Rick should be retired on Nov. 7th, when we retire Weldon.

[CASEY]:And I would just ask Senator Santorum: Donald Rumsfeld, I’ve called for him to be replaced, Rick. Where do you stand on that?
[SANTORUM]: I’ll be happy to start there. I think Secretary Rumsfeld has done a fine job as the defense secretary

If Rick thinks Rumsfeld is doing a fine job, what criteria would he consider to be a terrible job? If I had a record like Rick's, I'd advocate a low bar for success resign in disgrace. (I guess I have a different bar for personal integrity.)

[MR. RUSSERT]: But knowing what you know now about the weapons of mass destruction, the primary rationale for the war, would you believe that the Iraq war was a war of choice or a war of necessity?
[SANTORUM]: I believe that it was a war of necessity because it—they are a—they were a threat.

The only threat for guys like Santorum, Weldon and the rest of the GOP is NOT having some enemy with which to scare us. If they can't find a realistic threat, they build one up.

Their current tactic is to shift the rhetoric away from the unpopular fiction Iraq to a new enemy: Iran.

[MR. RUSSERT]: Would you put more troops in Iraq?
[SANTORUM]: I don’t know if it’s a question of more troops or less troops. You get—I, I think the focus should not be Iraq, should be Iran.

Rick later expands on what a big threat Iran is. Russert points out the irony that since we removed Saddam that Iran now has more influence that it did before. Rick was undeterred with a Rumsfeldian remark about how freedom does give places like Iran access. As Maxwell Smart would say: The old "price of Freedom" trick. That's the second time I've fallen for it this year.

As for Rick Santorum's voting record and opinion of George Bush...

[RUSSERT]:And if you go to Congressional Quarterly and review your voting record in support of the president, here it is: In 2005 you were with him 95 percent of the time, 100 percent of the time in ‘04, 99 in ‘03, 96 in ‘02, 97 in ‘01. Ken Mehlman, the president’s hand-picked chairman of the Republican National Committee, said the most important priority in ‘06 is re-electing Rick Santorum. George Bush and Rick Santorum have governed very much in lock-step.
[SANTORUM]: Absolutely. I agree with the president, as you see, a vast majority of the time. When I agree with him, I say it. And when I don’t agree with him, I, I say it, too.
[RUSSERT]: You think he’s a great president?
[SANTORUM]: I think he’s been a terrific president, absolutely.

I guess we know how Rick would answer Stephen Colbert's "Great President or Greatest President?" question.
See, here is how lowering that bar comes in to play. In the Gospel according to Rick.. Rumsfeld is doing a fine job and by that standard, Bush is a terrific president. This is part of the No Incompetent Left Behind policy the GOP instituted as they continue to block the American people from getting answers, under oath, from this Administration.
(As for rating the Rumsfeld-Bush team, I would have gone with f***-ed up job and terrible president.)

I give Rick credit in one regard over Weldon: Rick hasn't cut-and-run from his record of support for Bush these past six years (though Russert noticed that, in speeches, Rick is emphasizing insignificant differences with Bush).

Weldon is like a girl in a bridal party acting like her dress is different. (Curt, tucking your dress in your pantyhose is different, but it's still the same dress.)

Number of Vulnerable GOP Districts Doubled Over Summer

In today's Washington Post:
More GOP Districts Counted as Vulnerable: Number Doubled Over the Summer

Over the summer, the political battlefield has expanded well beyond the roughly 20 GOP House seats originally thought to be vulnerable. Now some Republicans concede there may be almost twice as many districts from which Democrats could wrest the 15 additional seats they need to take control.

This furthers the argument for selecting Sestak over Weldon, since Weldon would no longer be a member of the majority or run any committees. Setak, on the otherhand, would be a rising star in the majority and bring positive attention to the 7th district.

Republicans are hoping for some outside event that would show the president and their party in a better light -- a spate of good news from Iraq, a foiled terrorist plot or an unlikely break in the deadlock over immigration on Capitol Hill.

This is because INSIDE events (like their performance and voting records) show the don't deserve the jobs.

One prominent consultant -- who like many of the people interviewed for this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to offer candid appraisals -- put the odds of a Democratic takeover at 75 percent. Another strategist who has worked as part of Bush's campaign team said he believes there is a 9-in-10 chance that Republicans will lose their 12-year-old House majority.
Other GOP officials, while nervous, believe they can hold the House with aggressive local campaigns and a national effort to focus on terrorism and security to raise voter fears about the consequences of Democratic control.
All predict one of the most negative midterm elections in memory, with virtually no positive advertising from the national GOP committees or individual GOP candidates.

Wow! It almost sounds they they are covering Weldon and Puppio's negative campaign strategy.

Since the start of the year, at least 18 more Republicans have gone on the "watch list" for potential defeat. They include veterans such as Anne M. Northup of Kentucky and Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania, and freshmen such as Thelma D. Drake of Virginia Beach.

Curt, that's you baby!! Don't you just love seeing your name in print? So vulnerable that you made the short-list! Way to go!