NationStates Jolt Archive

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

Other Republicans, however, worry that such a scenario carries high risk, pointing out that an attack might suggest the President has not done enough to protect the country.

“We also have to face the fact that many Americans no longer trust the President,” says a longtime GOP strategist. “That makes it harder for him to become a rallying point.”

The memo outlines other scenarios, including:

--Capture of Osama bin Laden (or proof that he is dead);

--A drastic turnaround in the economy;

--A "successful resolution" of the Iraq war.

GOP memos no longer talk of “victory” in Iraq but use the term “successful resolution.”

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

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

Other Republicans, however, worry that such a scenario carries high risk, pointing out that an attack might suggest the President has not done enough to protect the country.

“We also have to face the fact that many Americans no longer trust the President,” says a longtime GOP strategist. “That makes it harder for him to become a rallying point.”

The memo outlines other scenarios, including:

--Capture of Osama bin Laden (or proof that he is dead);

--A drastic turnaround in the economy;

--A "successful resolution" of the Iraq war.

GOP memos no longer talk of “victory” in Iraq but use the term “successful resolution.”

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

I would think that a second terrorist attack on American soil would undermine support for Bush since it would invalidate the "We have prevented terrorist attacks on American soil since 9-11" claim that the Busheviks keep pushing as the main excuse for the shoddy invasion and occupation of Iraq. If a second terrorist attack hits American soil there should be outrage at the Bush Adminstration as well as the terrorists, for an empty promise.

I would think that a second terrorist attack on American soil would undermine support for Bush since it would invalidate the "We have prevented terrorist attacks on American soil since 9-11" claim that the Busheviks keep pushing as the main excuse for the shoddy invasion and occupation of Iraq. If a second terrorist attack hits American soil there should be outrage at the Bush Adminstration as well as the terrorists, for an empty promise.The 9-11 attack sent his ratings skyhigh...even if apparently the CIA and the rest of the Gov did a very poor Job...

besides...a quick look at the polls...tells me they have nothing to lose.

Indeed. The GOP beats the Dems hands down on nearly every security issue.

However, I doubt Bush would deliberately turn a blind eye to a terrorist plot just to gain popularity. I don't agree with his politics, but he's not an evil Machiavellian schemer by any means.

I'd get some tin foil, but apparently someone started a thread about it not working. I wonder if the same is true for aluminium foil, which is what we usually have on this side of the pond...

I'd get some tin foil, but apparently someone started a thread about it not working. I wonder if the same is true for aluminium foil, which is what we usually have on this side of the pond...

It's the same thing. Trust me. My father works in an alumina-processing plant.

It's the same thing. Trust me. My father works in an alumina-processing plant.

Wait, tin foil isn't made out of tin? :eek:

WTF?

Wait, tin foil isn't made out of tin? :eek:

WTF?

"Tin foil was commercially available before the aluminium counterpart, and some people continue to refer to the new product by the name of the old one."
-Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil)

Tin cans are also mainly aluminium.

"Tin foil was commercially available before the aluminium counterpart, and some people continue to refer to the new product by the name of the old one."
-Wiki

Well, that's a big let down.

It's pretty obvious, isn't it?

They kept raising the "terror-level" at first, whenever they felt they needed a boost in the opinion polls.
After a while people realised that nothing happens, that they never actually say what the threat is, nor where they get the info from. So they don't care anymore.

So recently they suddenly made it more specific, with the NY train scares...searching people's bags etc etc. Again, no actual details, and I believe the whole intel was actually fraudulent. Plus they used info from Iraq of all places as justification, thus conveniently linking Iraq to Terrorism.

People will get cynical about that too...and I don't know what the next stage in that logical progression would be (that is to say that I do know, but I don't know how far they would go).

It's pretty obvious, isn't it?

They kept raising the "terror-level" at first, whenever they felt they needed a boost in the opinion polls.
After a while people realised that nothing happens, that they never actually say what the threat is, nor where they get the info from. So they don't care anymore.

I believe the terror alert level has never been on the two bottom levels, yes?

It's pretty obvious, isn't it?

They kept raising the "terror-level" at first, whenever they felt they needed a boost in the opinion polls.
After a while people realised that nothing happens, that they never actually say what the threat is, nor where they get the info from. So they don't care anymore.

So recently they suddenly made it more specific, with the NY train scares...searching people's bags etc etc. Again, no actual details, and I believe the whole intel was actually fraudulent. Plus they used info from Iraq of all places as justification, thus conveniently linking Iraq to Terrorism.

People will get cynical about that too...and I don't know what the next stage in that logical progression would be (that is to say that I do know, but I don't know how far they would go).

If America was a Max Barry novel, the next step would be "terrorists" carrying out actual attacks against Americans, only to be shot by security after a dozen or so civilians end up as casualties for authenticity.

If America was a Max Barry novel, the next step would be "terrorists" carrying out actual attacks against Americas, only to be shot by security after a dozen or so civilians end up as casualties for authenticity.

It would also be funnier, and more gripping.

I believe the terror alert level has never been on the two bottom levels, yes?
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/28609695/m/906001975731
Don't think so.

Jeesus, some people just go overboard...
http://noosphere.princeton.edu/terror.html

Well what else can Bush do?

People are just not impressed with #3s anymore ;)

The economy is already taking off again.

I suspect Bush to come out saying they've killed "but cannot verify" Osama, too.