Yesterday, we talked about prominent far-right conservative writers who hoped to exploit the [tag]thwarted[/tag] [tag]hijacking[/tag] [tag]plot[/tag] for political gain, even though the plot did nothing to bolster their argument. Of course, it’s not just writers — the [tag]Bush[/tag] [tag]White House[/tag] and [tag]GOP[/tag] officials kicked their exploitation machine into high gear.
“Weeks before [tag]September 11th[/tag], this is going to [tag]play big[/tag],” said another White House official, who also spoke on condition of not being named, adding that some [tag]Democratic[/tag] candidates won’t “look as appealing” under the circumstances.
Just as bad, Jesse Lee noted that the [tag]RNC[/tag], just a few hours after the nation learned of the terrorist plot, sent out a fundraising email penned by [tag]Rudy Giuliani[/tag] saying, “In the middle of a [tag]war on terror[/tag], we need to remain focused on furthering [tag]Republican[/tag] ideas more than ever before… Please make your commitment felt with a financial contribution for $500, $250, $100, $50, $35 or $25 to the Republican National Committee today.”
It’s possible that the Giuliani [tag]fundraising[/tag] pitch was scheduled to go out yesterday afternoon anyway, and would have been sent regardless of the circumstances. But as Hunter argued, “maybe the Republicans might have cancelled the message and waited, oh, at least a day or two or so before using the [tag]terrorism[/tag] plot as a damn fundraising tool?”
That would require some sense of decency. We’re well past that point now.
It became trendy in evangelical youth circles a few years ago to ask “WWJD?” for “what would Jesus do?” I frequently follow a similar route but ask myself “WWRD?” or “what would Rove do?”
In this case, imagine the response Karl Rove would orchestrate if, say, Howard Dean had penned a fundraising letter that sought to raise money off a terrorist threat the same day a top-level Democratic official salivated over the notion that a thwarted plot to kill hundreds would “play big” in a campaign context.
What would the response be? The demands for a formal apology would be overwhelming. The right would insist that Dean resign, if not put his head on a platter. Ken Mehlman would deliver every speech for six months with the same anecdote, “Republicans believe in fighting a war on terror; Democrats believe in using it as a fundraising gimmick.”
Every prominent Democratic official in the country would face a flurry of questions about whether they’re willing to denounce such shameless political exploitation, and most of them would. The story would dominate the cable networks, talk radio, and the blogs. The blowback would be almost literally crushing. Don’t believe me? Consider the reaction to a mild DCCC web video that featured a brief still image of a casket returning from Iraq. It was completely inoffensive — but the right milked it for a week and got several Dem candidates to publicly denounce the video.
This is not to say Dems are sitting back and accepting the GOP’s callous nonsense; they’re not. But when we hear complaints about Dems bringing a knife to a gunfight, this is exactly what the complaints are referring to.