Good Afternoon . . .
Up to now the Democrats have failed to present a plan to save Social Security. Instead Democrats have chosen only to offer criticism of President Bush's plan. The Democrats have said anything and everything to demonstrate that the P{resident's plan will not work, will increase debt, and will not save Social Security. Their only plan is to scare seniors and others depending on Social Security and to say there is no crisis. Yet, there is no Democrat plan.
Now a memo written by long-time Democrat strategist James Carville and his partner, Stan Greenburg, has infuriated Democrats on Capitol Hill.
The memo written last month says that the Democrats need to offer a plan or solution to save Social Security. The memo claims that Democrats have gained little in the polls despite skepticism about the president's proposal.
The language in the Carville-Greenberg memo was frank: “Why has the public not taken their anger out on congressional Republicans and the president? We think the answer lies with voters’ deeper feelings about the Democrats who appear to lack direction, conviction, values, advocacy or a larger public purpose.”
For once, and this may be the only time, I tend to agree with Mr. Carville. In the long run, however, Democrats will not listen to Carville or anyone else who disagrees with the Democrat attack dogs.
Carville memo on Social Security angers Dems
--
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has asked the Queen to dissolve Parliament and has set May 5 as Polling Day in the UK. Blair will be running for his third, and last he says, term as PM. If the Labour Party wins the majority of seats in the House of Commons, Blair will become the first Labour PM to serve three terms.
In his announcement Blair said, "So, it's a big choice. A big decision. The British people are the boss and they are the ones who will make it."
Conservative Party leaders Michael Howard and Charles Kennedy were already on the campaign trail making various stops across the UK.
"They can either reward Mr Blair for eight years of broken promises and vote for another five years of talk. Or they can vote Conservative to support a party that's taken a stand and is committed to action on the issues that matter to hardworking Britain." Pointing to a highly aggressive four weeks of campaigning, Mr Howard mocked the "smirking politics of Mr Blair or the woolly thinking of Liberal Democrats".
Early polls show Labour with a small lead over Conservative and other parties.
ThisisLondon
--
Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani has not decided what office to run for in 2006 or 2008. A match-up between Giuliani and Hillary Clinton for Senate would place Giuliani in the national spotlight and position him well for a presidential bid in 2008. There are comments from the Giuliani camp that he will "probably" run for Governor in New York in 2006.
Either racer is a win-win for Giuliani. If he narrowly loses to Clinton for Senate his star will continue to rise and put him in a better position for 2008 when he would face Clinton again.
Running for governor would give Giuliani additional executive experience and, again, position him well for 2008. What will Rudy do? Rudy seems to be happy working at his new law form in New York and has made no comment on either race.
Giuliani has made some comments on the controversy surrounding University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill. In a speech at CU, Giuliani said he took Churchill's remarks personally because "the people he was talking about were people I knew."
Giuliani went on to say that he would not want Churchill teaching his kids.
WorldNetDaily: Giuliani 'too busy' to challenge Hillary
Rocky Mountain News: Local
--
More tomorrow.
No comments:
Post a Comment