GOP memo touts new terror attack as way to reverse party's decline

GOP memo touts new terror attack as way to reverse party's decline
By DOUG THOMPSON
Publisher, Capitol Hill Blue
Nov 10, 2005, 06:19

A confidential memo circulating among senior Republican leaders suggests that a new attack by terrorists on U.S. soil could reverse the sagging fortunes of President George W. Bush as well as the GOP and "restore his image as a leader of the American people." The closely-guarded memo lays out a list of scenarios to bring the Republican party back from the political brink, including a devastating attack by terrorists that could “validate” the President’s war on terror and allow Bush to “unite the country” in a “time of national shock and sorrow.”

The memo says such a reversal in the President's fortunes could keep the party from losing control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections. GOP insiders who have seen the memo admit it’s a risky strategy and point out that such scenarios are “blue sky thinking” that often occurs in political planning sessions. “The President’s popularity was at an all-time high following the 9/11 attacks,” admits one aide. “Americans band together at a time of crisis.”...

GOP memos no longer talk of “victory” in Iraq but use the term “successful resolution.” “A successful resolution would be us getting out intact and civil war not breaking out until after the midterm elections,” says one insider...

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7639.shtml

a real one with crdibility somewhat higher than the Onion.

be easy. No need for the snark attack

Maybe Skinner should start work on that list of unaccepatable sources and links. I've seen a couple, including The Site That Shall Not Be Named in the last few days.

he blew it.

That said, CHB is not a reliable or reputable source.

a memo isn't needed to tell everyone that Bush's fortunes are tied to terror and terror scares. It's been the working premise of the WH and republican party since the first polls came out after 9/11, and was validated in the mid terms.

Unless people write memos on the sky being blue, this memo never happened. The strategy is there, but not the memo.

A terror attack on US soil now would simply be proof that Georgie can't protect us anywhere.

And the rescue would be the usual pitiful FEMA mess.

Besides, any attack with a kill ratio smaller than 9/11 or damage less than Katrina would be looked at as, oh, so what, assholes, we've been hit bigger and worse.

Blowing up American hotels in American cities, for instance, might make me question what the tourist industry ever did to George to make him hate them so, but it wouldn't really make a dent. Not after seeing Americans beg for water on the streets of New Orleans.

Capitol Hill Blue is very sketchy source.

Freakin' dildo...

gives some validity to those of us who believe that they LIHOP and/or MIHOP-9/11 that is.Un frickin believeable

I've always believed that they were going to do something like a 9/11 when Bush's numbers were what,41% in the August before.Hey the PNAC guidelines a "Pearl Harbor like attack" to implement those policies-so how far of a leap is it really?

That goes for Shrub's crackup and this GOP policy of rule by terror. We all know this is true, but it's still fiction.

Treat it as wish fulfillment or highly realistic SF. I kinda dig it, as I do Phillip K. Dick - but, wouldn't cite this as fact any more than I would treat "Valis" to be an accurate history of the Nixon Administration.

all the shite the repukes have pulled..why wouldn't it be? So, if this is true..well, aren't they the Stupid ones.

That was part of their whole recent campaign for the $6Billion a month war on Iraq.."fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here".

Another thing is that there hasn't been a terrorist attack here since 9/11( the biggest failure of national defense in history) so people were feeling safe, if that changes there is no reason not to kick these incompetents out.

They're a sick bunch of sob who are cornered and dangerous to the nation.

the supposed premise of terrorism being good for the GOP is not so. Talking and emphasizing Republican points and supposed strength on terrorism works nicely to draw support up the polling ceiling there is, but every major attack in the U.S. or Western Europe drops that ceiling after a peaking to it. It's like running shortcuts over thin ice- it's a good idea and worth it until that time the ice breaks and you fall in the drink.

Americans do band together. Bush might be the one they exclude from that banding, only letting him in on the Republican fring parts rather than among average people.

It's a counting up of all eggs from which there might be chickens and openly praying for all of them to hatch and sort of expecting it too.

But I think this is CHB's usual game. If they do have sources, it seems to be low level secretaries who aren't let in on how important or unimportant particular memos or arguments really are.

so does that make it any more credible?