Thursday, September 21, 2006

More on Mark

To follow up on our post earlier this week on Warner.

  • Ex-VA Gov. Mark Warner (D) wants you to know: he thinks the Bush tax cuts for the richest Americans, enacted during an expensive war and with rising federal budget deficits, were "morally wrong and economically wrong" and that he would indeed support their repeal. Warner, in an interview with The Hotline yesterday clarified his comments Monday in Iowa, which were reported by the Des Moines Register.

That's why the Forward Together folks were on the blog prowl Tuesday.

  • Intesting comments from Karl Rove in this article about Mark Warner...."White House political strategist Karl Rove says Democrats such as Warner and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson are not serious about winning the Democratic nomination because they know it will almost certainly go to Clinton.
    “Anybody who thinks that she’s not going to be the candidate is kidding themselves,” Rove says. “I mean, all this stuff about, you know, Warner or Richardson — all these guys are preening for the vice presidential slot.”"

Candid comments from the architect.

For those that don't already know, Bill Frist will be doing a skeet shoot fundraiser for RPI coming up on Saturday. And Tom Ridge will be headlining the Reagan Dinner (looks like we were wrong on that one)....


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who is Tom Ridge?

9:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, we're still prowling the blogs. Wanted to be sure that you saw that Beaumont of the Des Moines Register is now saying that he included the Governor's moral and economic opposition to the Bush tax cuts but the Register's editors cut it out.
Steve Soto of the Left Coaster has it:
"I received an email from Tom Beaumont today, wherein he told me his original version of the story did include Warner's quotes that the Bush tax cuts were immoral in a time of war, but these quotes for some reason were deleted by his editor."

Nate Wilcox
Forward Together PAC

12:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Clearly Rove does not talk to a lot of grassroots D's. There is a strong "anyone but Hillary" sentiment among us D activists. Often to our peril, we D's tend to nominate people we think have the best chance of winning. Many D's realize Hillary is not that candidate.

1:06 PM  
Blogger Yoda said...

Hmmm..... In 2004 you almost nominated the one we republicans had been praying for, Howard Dean. Hillary in '08 would be welcomed by our base as well....

1:28 PM  
Blogger Caucus Cooler said...

It's great to see the D posts on the board! The cooler would love to have a Democrat participant in the blog. If anyone out there is up to the task email

3:01 PM  
Blogger Pondering American said...

You know I am not a big fan of the Clintons to say the least. But I have to disagree with Rove on this a tad. Perhaps it is me but when I see H Clinton she doesnt really grab me very much. It is almost like a Democrat version of Bob Dole in in 96. You know its his turn blah blah. Even though H CLinton has jumped a lot of hoops and jumped in the line quite a few places. Not to take anything away from Dole who was a great American. I am much more concerned about a fresh face as the Dem nominee.

4:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why on Earth would Bill Clinton want to be Hillary's subordinate? Do you think he really wants to sit in Hillary's old office while she sits in the Oval Office? He couldn't chase women nearly as easily with all the extra secret service around and it sets up Hillary to get more attention than Bill. Bill's narcissim won't allow that. Walking behind Hillary with her as Pres?

Nope..not gonna happen.

5:30 PM  
Blogger murphy said...

Anon 5:30,

Billy would LOVE it. He's been talking about how he'd like to be first-husband since she won her Senate campaign.

7:24 PM  
Blogger Cancer Man said...


Are you sure you are talking about Hillary and not McCain?

9:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Why would Bill love it? What's in it for him?

12:22 PM  
Blogger murphy said...


1. Additional influence & involvement compared to what he has now.
2. Bill and Hill share a lot of policy.
3. Bill's fairly secure with himself.
4. Why would Bill be Hill's strongest cheerleader if he didn't love it?

12:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How could Bill possibly get more influence. Heck..he's a regular pied piper to D's. I still don't get it cause he presided as an R. Yet, you guys react to him like he's Mick Jagger in tights.

Bill and Hillary frequently disagree. Remember their very public opposite positions on the ports? WHile Hill was critical, Bill was arranging the deal! Some togetherness.

Yes, Bill is very secure with himself. He's his own favorite person (you're so vain, you probalby think this song is about you). He is narcissitic to the core and can't stand it if Hill gets more attention than Bill.

Bill LOVES cheerleading cause it gets him on news programs. He's an attention whore and he won't let Hill (or anyone) get more than he gets.

He won't let her get attention now.

Hill is a fool and no feminist by any measure of what that used to mean back in the 70's.

8:25 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

  • Caucus Coolerisms
  • The Cooler Line

    Mike Huckabee 10-9
    Mitt Romney 3-1
    Fred Thompson 9-1
    John McCain 9-1
    Rudy Giuliani 12-1
    Ron Paul 12-1
    Duncan Hunter 98-1
    The Cooler line is an exclusive creation of Caucus Cooler and will be updated as the political environment changes.
    It is an unscientific assessment of the Iowa Caucus (not the Presidential race as a whole) from an insiders view at the given time. The line IS NOW mathematically accurate but is NOT intended for gambling purposes. Information may only be reproduced with credit to the Caucus Cooler.