Feb. 15, 2008
RNC Chair: Party Will Win On Security
Political Players: Mike Duncan Says Republicans Are Better Able to Protect America
-
RNC Chairman Mike Duncan (AP)
-
In The Spotlight Campaign Watch '08 Check out the latest campaign ads in the race for the White House.
-
Quiz Candidates Quiz Test your knowledge of the presidential contenders.
Past Political Players:
• McCain Adviser Carly Fiorina
• Ex-Clinton Adviser Mark Penn
• Southern Baptist Convention's Richard Land
• Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz
• McCain Adviser Carly Fiorina
• Ex-Clinton Adviser Mark Penn
• Southern Baptist Convention's Richard Land
• Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz
CBSNews.com: Obviously, Senator McCain is your party’s presumptive nominee. It doesn't seem like there's any real way for Governor Huckabee to catch up. Is it bad for the party, in your view, for him to continue to stay in this race?
Mike Duncan: Well, I certainly would much rather be in our position, than to be in the position of Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democrats. Because our process will come to a conclusion before our convention, and their process won't. And they're having a lot of problems with that right now.
CBSNews.com: Do you think Governor Huckabee staying in hurts your ability to unify and galvanize your supporters for the general election?
Mike Duncan: I've been around this for a long time. I started working in politics in 1972. And I've heard that argument time after time. Given the stark contrast, I don't think, in my lifetime, there has been a wider line of division between the two parties. And that's why, given the chance, our voters will come home.
Because they see that the alternative is a candidate who believes in higher taxes, more government--someone who believes in creating government bureaucracies to take choice out of healthcare, someone who believes in appointing people who legislate from the bench.
CBSNews.com: But isn't that exactly the charge a lot of conservatives have leveled against Senator McCain? That he's not as strong on conservative judges, that he's not as strong on taxes, that he's not as strong in support of the social issues. So are you sure the difference is stark enough to attract those Laura Ingrahams and Rush Limbaughs and Ann Coulters back into the fold?
Mike Duncan: Well, I am. Because, let's talk about the Democratic candidates just for a second. We've got a real interesting pick on the Democratic side, and it's certainly up to the voters to determine.
Barack Obama has an experience issue. And the question that the American people will ultimately decide is, is he ready to be commander-in-chief of the United States?
On the other hand, you've got Senator Clinton. And the issue there is trust. Can the American people trust Senator Clinton? And, currently, two-thirds of the people say that she would say or do anything to be elected president. More than half the people don't trust her. She has very high negatives. Maybe the highest for a candidate at this point, since we've been tracking it in a primary.
CBSNews.com: Is your argument more against the Democrats than for your Republican nominee?
Mike Duncan: No, I don't think that's the case. I was answering your specific question. It's very positive. On the Republican side, both of our remaining candidates have been talking about the values that we consider the core of our party. The core of our party is about the American dream.
And the values there have to do with smaller government--government that protects you certainly, but also a government that lets you go and lets you develop over a period of time, and lowers taxes. Because we know that lower taxes puts more money into the economy, which helps with that American dream.
CBSNews.com: But what about the charge-as one Republican said to me-that one of the reasons you're having trouble motivating your base is that Bill Clinton didn't grow the government as much as George W. Bush has?
Mike Duncan: Well, on the motivation thing, I hear that too. Let me go back and say that in 2006 we were disappointed with the results. And we learned some lessons. Look what we did in 2007. Look how successful the Republican Congress was in stopping the Democrats’ spending.
Now we need to do more on the tax issue. We've got to make sure that these tax decreases become permanent over a period of time. But our base is motivated by that. We had over 800,000 individual donors at the RNC last year. We raised $83 million. We out raised the DNC by over $30 million.
While the Democrats are having a good turnout in their primaries, we are, too. In some states we're having record turnouts in our primaries. And I feel very good about the motivational base and our ability to come together this fall.
CBSNews.com: And you think those very loud voices, those radio talk show hosts, will come onboard?
Mike Duncan: Well, I have a historic perspective. We didn't have as much talk radio twenty years ago. But there were always leaders of the different factions of the party. And they always strenuously presented their case. But, at the end of the day, they looked at the choices they had.
This is a leadership contest between two people to be the leader of the free world. And they filter it down and they look at it through issues, and they come down and they ask questions. Can I trust this person to be the commander-in-chief? Is this person ready to be the commander-in-chief of the United States? And I believe that, given the opportunity, our conservative voters will be with us this fall.
CBSNews.com: Congressman John Shadegg of Arizona announced this week that he's retiring. [His spokesman has since said that he may reconsider.] He's the 29th Republican House member to say he won’t seek re-election. Do you think that's a vote of no confidence in your ability to take back the Congress?
Mike Duncan: I think these are individual decisions that people make on whether they run for reelection to Congress or not. I mean you can go through the list. There are some who are running for higher office. There are some who have family considerations. Some feel that it's important that they want to do other things and go on. These are very individual decisions.
CBSNews.com: And let me ask you about what some commentators have called a broader enthusiasm gap between the two parties. 14.6 million Democrats voted on Super Tuesday. Only about 9 million Republicans voted. The Democratic presidential candidates, taken as a whole, have significantly outraised the Republican presidential candidates. Are you worried about that?
Mike Duncan: Well, they're also broke. One of the good things about this, is that we can look at all of the money that they've spent on each other. And money has some direct correlation with the turnout in politics. So again, I would much rather be in my position than Chairman Dean's position.
Let me talk to you about the number of people that turn out in primaries. I've gone back and looked at this historically. In the last nine primaries, there is not a correlation between the number of people who vote in the primaries and which party is elected in the fall. If so, Ronald Reagan would not have been elected. Or George Bush, 41, would not have been elected. So while all of this is very interesting, typically, the party out of power has more turnout in their primaries in presidential years than the party in power.
CBSNews.com: What is the big Republican vision for 2008? A number of commentators--David Brooks comes to my mind--have said that, lower taxes, smaller government and strong defense, has been the Republican message for 20 years. And it's very important, obviously, but that you need something more to offer voters for 2008. What do you think that is?
Mike Duncan: Well, our vision is--and it's a simple message. It's this whole vision of personal security. And are we better, personally secure today, more than we were on 9-11. And I think the answer to that is, yes. And why? It's because of the policies of the Republican Party. And we've got to make sure that those policies are in place. And that's the basic reason for government, and that's where we have to start.
The other is are we better off by having the 200 and some odd federal judges that have been appointed by the president. And the answer there is, yes. I mean, John Roberts and Sam Alito have made a significant difference on the court and the direction of people's lives in this country.
And finally, are we better off having lower taxes and less government. The tax cuts that a Republican Congress and President Bush put into place after 9-11 have led us to 54 consecutive months of growth.
We're having a downturn at the current time. The stimulus package was just passed. The president took the lead on that. These are basic issues. And these are basic issues that people filter through this idea of who they trust to be the leader of the free world.
CBSNews.com: But the president has an approval rating that's been stuck in the 20s or 30s for over a year.
Mike Duncan: The Congressional approval rating is lower than the president's approval rating.
CBSNews.com: But Americans don't feel better off economically than they did eight years ago. How do you turn that around?
Mike Duncan: It's getting our message out to the American people. And our presidential candidate will be the one who will be crafting that message. So that person can give you more of the specifics. But the basics are there that unite the party.
Mike Duncan is serving his third term as Republican National Committeeman from Kentucky and was appointed the party's chairman by President Bush in 2007. He had served, since 2001, as Treasurer and then General Counsel of the RNC. He is the principal owner of two community banking companies in Eastern Kentucky. Duncan also has extensive experience working in state university systems and not-for-profit student mentoring and rural development programs. Duncan is married with one son.
By Brian Goldsmith
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
More From Political Players
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 56 CommentsUnfortunately, like the "Illegal Immigration Problem" story the Republicans have been trying to make a core issue of the past few months, the people of America aren''t buying it any more.
Duncan''s also wrong in a much larger sense. The Republican party won''t "win on security" because they''re not going to win at all.
Maybe YOU guys are. But you''ve sold the rest of us down the river.
This administration got us into a war using false or misinterpreted information, has suffered more leaks than New Orleans'' levees, has "lost" millions of veterans'' ID info, deliberately revenge-outted an active CIA operative, let bin Laden escape, was prepared to outsource U.S. port security to a foreign country, sold a 3 trillion dollar debt to our enemies, etc., etc.
More secure? You''re delusional! If the Republicans are going to pin their White House hopes on the security issue, they''d better have an escape clause in their contract with the movers. The closest they''ll get to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is the public tour.
Political Players: Mike Duncan Says Republicans Are Better Able to Protect America
CORRECTION:
RNC Chair: Party Will Win On Fear
Political Players: Mike Duncan Says Republicans Are Better Able to Scare America
Posted by Jack3213 at 02:01 PM : Feb 16, 2008
No bid contracts.
Halliburton to a tee...
by Ben Wizner
Of the myriad tactics the Bush administratio uses to prevent oversight of its controversial anti-terror policies, none has been more successful, or more far-reaching, than the state secrets privilege. On Wednesday, the Senate considered, at long last, bipartisan legislation that would place reasonable limits on the executive branch%u2019s use of the privilege to terminate lawsuits on dubious grounds. But for some %u2014 like my client, Khaled El-Masri, who was mistakenly kidnapped, imprisoned and tortured by the CIA %u2014 Congress%u2019 interest, though welcome, comes too late.
The state secrets privilege, first recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court half a century ago, permits the government to block the release during litigation of information or evidence that poses a national security risk. No one seriously disputes the validity of the underlying doctrine: Litigants should not be permitted to use the discovery process to expose the identity of the next Valerie Plame.
(cont)
But in recent years, the state secrets privilege has mutated from a rule of evidence into a virtual grant of immunity. This administration has invoked the privilege not to protect sensitive information but to torpedo entire lawsuits alleging grave executive misconduct %u2014 before any requests for evidence have been made.
Khaled El-Masri%u2019s case is illustrative. El-Masri, a German citizen, was forcibly abducted while on holiday in Macedonia, detained incommunicado, handed over to the CIA, then beaten, drugged and transported to a secret prison in Afghanistan for harsh interrogation. Five months after his abduction %u2014 long after the CIA realized its mistake %u2014 El-Masri was deposited at night on a hill in Albania.
(cont)
El-Masri%u2019s ordeal received front-page media coverage throughout the world and has been the subject of criminal and intergovernmental investigations in Europe. Nonetheless, when we brought suit against former CIA Director George Tenet and others seeking compensation for the brutal treatment of El-Masri, the administration insisted the case be dismissed because any litigation of the claims would reveal state secrets. The government%u2019s argument prevailed, and the Supreme Court declined to intervene.
So as the law stands, the U.S. can engage in torture, declare it a state secret and, by virtue of that designation alone, avoid any accountability for conduct that violates the Constitution and universal human rights guarantees. A broad range of executive misconduct has been shielded from judicial review under this doctrine.
The State Secrets Protection Act would prohibit the dismissal of cases prior to discovery. The legislation would require courts to examine the actual classified evidence instead of dismissing suits on the sole basis of affidavits submitted by the perpetrators themselves. It would also allow courts to compel the government to produce unclassified substitutes for privileged evidence and, if the government refuses, to resolve the issue in favor of the plaintiff.
These overdue amendments can ensure that other pending cases are not unjustly terminated.
p m carpenter''s commentary
"We love ya big guy, but for heaven''s sake don''t call us. We''ll call you."
That''s the official word from McCain''s High Command to the occupying regime of George W. Bush, as reported this morning by the New York Times after a weekend what-to-do-about-George strategy session in Arizona.
"Senator John McCain''s campaign advisers will ask the White House to deploy President Bush for major Republican fund-raising, but they do not want the president to appear too often at his side," reveals the Times, as revealed to it by the behind-the-eight-ball boys.
(cont)
Things like that must be put ... uh, delicately. In effect, they need George''s money -- oh, how they need his money -- but let''s face it: he''s drenched in voter-repellent. This may be America but 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is seen by the vast multitudes as enemy territory. Thanks a lot, George, for greasing the skids of your would-be Republican successor with molasses.
Nevertheless there''s that matter of dangled money, which in politics, as in life, has a certain magnetic charm -- a certain pull in the way of patching up bruised relationships. You know, like ones in which you were falsely excoriated before a third of your base for having fathered an illegitimate child, costing you your dream of a lifetime and leaving you wandering in the wilderness for years.
But the thought of those plain brown envelopes stuffed with right-wing cash has McCain''s advisers feeling that Christian warmth of forgiveness. "We were dyspeptic jerks who held grudges," said one, perhaps merely in happy anticipation of getting back on a payroll that actually pays. Every month.
(cont)
Yet there''s a second "nevertheless." And this one, practically speaking, may be a whole lot tougher to overcome than the emotional stuff.
As the Times understated the political undertow, the McCain camp is staring down the barrel of a "difficult calculus" -- that of "using Mr. Bush enough to try to make the tough sell of Mr. McCain to conservatives but not so much that he will drive away the independents and some moderate Democrats that Mr. McCain is counting on in November."
The problem, of course, is that using Mr. Bush at all -- which they''ve already conceded they must do -- will approach the equivalent of Alf Landon having had Herbert Hoover dragging behind him on the 1936 campaign trail; of taking a dire calculus and making it immeasurably dismal.
(cont)
Every time John and George are caught together on camera, the improbable pair will remind voters -- moderates, independents and even that handful of thoughtful conservatives -- that the latter just spent eight years, as Jonathan Rauch of the National Journal has painted the GOP''s smiley face, sponsoring little more than "ruthless partisanship ... fiscal recklessness ... polarization ... presidential monarchism ... [and the] erosion of U.S. credibility on human rights." All are welcome to add to this list of U.S. fortunes-reversal, and they will.
The solution, says Rauch, is McCain. "If the Bush years were snakebit, think of McCain as an antivenin.... Wise Republicans know, to begin with, that the party is lost if it cannot rebuild its own center and appeal to the country''s."
In short, McCain and some message of moderation can overcome the electorally narrowing megalomania of Karl Rove. The center shall set him -- and his party -- free.
Host Wolf Blitzer floated out the exact same argument William Kristol did on Fox, which is this notion that Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell, is some sort of apolitical figure and somehow that makes him more believable. Reed shot that down, reminding Blitzer that the previous FISA laws are still in place and that U.S. intelligence can still go after suspects for several days before requesting a warrant.
He had not one *** thing to say about Bush being the criminal he is...and how he''s almost destroyed this country!
Listen to this:
Mike Duncan: The Congressional approval rating is lower than the president''s approval rating.
ROFL! It only has a low rating because the Neocons say so! Our Congress is doing just fine by not sending anything to this bustward that can be vetoed and sent back to be rewritten his way! He''s only gotten some very very essential legislation...and he''ll not get anymore!
And this:
CBSNews.com: But Americans don''t feel better off economically than they did eight years ago. How do you turn that around?
Mike Duncan: It''s getting our message out to the American people.
WELL GOOD LUCK WITH THAT! Hahahahaha!
Thank God
The Liberal Media and the Republican establishment don''t want the real poll numbers to be released showing how well Mike Huckabee is doing in those two states.
The Liberal media doesn''t want it because they know both Obama and Clinton''s selfish desires can''t compete with Huckabee''s down home charm in a national election.
And the Republican establishment doesn''t want it because they want to retain control over their money hungry control over taxes and greed.
Ohio and Texas have huge number of true conservative voters. The republican party & liberal media must come out of their shell and give John McCain and Mike Huckabee a chance to debate on live TV in both Ohio and Texas.
Conservative Newt Gingrich will be endorsing Mike Huckabee for President (Maybe a VP ticket). Read what Newt had to say about Mike:
"Over the past few months I%u2019ve been very impressed with the Governor%u2019s openness to new ideas and solutions for improving our country. He showed genuine leadership a few weeks ago by being the first candidate to sign the Nine Nineties in Nine debate pledge. By committing to a much more in-depth, solution-oriented political dialogue in our country, Governor Huckabee showed that he%u2019s truly interested in real change."
Huckabee was the 44th Governor of Arkansas and soon he will be the 44th President of America. All the connections are starting to light up now in the sky.
The Republicans have been playing that card for 7 years and if Americans didn''t wake up yet, I assume they either drank too much of the KOOL-AID or they are brain dead.
Posted by realpatriot1 at 06:25 PM : Feb 16, 2008
Boy I would love to hear there answers to your very insightful question. Way to go Realpatriot1
Posted by b-easy63 at 03:20 AM : Feb 17, 2008
+ repo
B-easy63I agree with you on this and we have to hear these candidates very clearly. One is baseing his campaign on security the old Bush campaign of fear, and the other is making inspirational speeches, he is saying what Americans have felt for going on 8 years, and finally someone is saying what the Americans have thought, but is he saying what he will do about it I say no. Another thinks evangelical will cure it all and to use the government that makes law, not for just evangelicals, but the country as a whole is wrong. He will need to just get out and I think it is a way for him to make some money ie: Cayman Island speech. A woman who has been battered and is not having her message seen, because the media hates her, what they say may be how they think, but have no right to keep her words off the screen. We are in a lot of trouble and no end in sight. I want someone to say this is what Bush did, and this is what we will do.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 56 Comments