Terry McAuliffe: Chavez is Bush’s fault

posted at 8:45 am on March 15, 2007 by Bryan

Last night I shook the hand of Terry McAuliffe. Believe me, I’m not saying that to brag. To say that I’m not a fan is an understatement. I’m just saying it to note that it’s possible to shake hands with someone that you disagree with across the board without being uncivilized. Liberals like McAuliffe can visit a college campus and never fear getting pied or shouted off the stage. Conservatives visiting college campuses are frequently not afforded the same courtesy.

The Clinton apologist and serious Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) sufferer came to the campus of the University of Maryland Baltimore County (UMBC–or “U Must Be Crazy”) to hawk his book, What A Party! He also did a Q&A and he teased me for being a) the only conservative in the crowd (even though I wasn’t) and b) for having a video camera there to capture his remarks.

How did he know that I’m a conservative? He asked the room to raise their hands if they voted for Kerry. Nearly all hands went up. He asked who voted for Bush. Mine went up. And I had the only video camera in the room. So I became the butt of several jokes, to the point that it earned me sympathy from the lady seated a couple of empty chairs over from me. He asked me, sitting in the back of the room, if I now wish I’d voted for Kerry. I gave him a nonchalant “No.” Being unhappy with Bush does not equate to pining for Jenjis Kerry. Given the same choice today, I’d still vote for Bush. That says more about Kerry than it says about Bush now, but it’s a fact.

The funniest moment came when McAuliffe asked the room to raise hands if they had read his book, and exactly one hand went up. One. I suppose all the many empty seats might have been filled with people who were at that very moment engrossed in his book, but we’ll just never know.

No, I can’t show you the video. It would make McAuliffe’s lawyers cry. Apparently they think he’ll sell more books if he visits college campuses, speaks to 60 mostly liberal people at a time and then none of his wit and wisdom end up on YouTube for the rest of the world’s enlightenment. I don’t get the strategy myself, but I gave him my word that the video won’t show up online, so it won’t.

But I can still tell you what he said. McAuliffe’s lawyers haven’t quite crushed all dissent yet.

His speech was typical Democrat boilerplate–I’m great, Democrats are the bestest, Republicans are bad, Bush is evil, Clinton was a humanitarian genius on a scale unequalled in the annals of time, etc etc. He was more entertaining than I expected when describing some of the silly and humiliating things he’s had to do to raise money for Democrats (stories that he pointed out–more than once–are in his book). PETA probably hates his story about rasslin’ a drugged, toothless alligator to secure a $15,000 donation from the Seminole Indians. That money went to Jimmy Carter’s failed effort against Ronald Reagan. So McAuliffe risked getting slimed or tailwhipped by a groggy gator to raise money for the president who helped usher in Tehran’s mullahcracy, and would later give Yasser Arafat and Hugo Chavez the democratic seal of approval. And he has the nerve to call Bush “the worst president in American history.” More than once.

McAuliffe was about as honest as I expected, which is to say that he didn’t strike me as being particularly honest. During Q&A, our own Ian pestered Terry Mac about his Global Crossing earnings. If you haven’t heard about that or his interesting land deal, well, you don’t know just how much of a hypocrite he is for criticizing the business deals of everyone named Bush. Ian did well going toe to toe with the man who ran the DNC for about 8 years.

Also during Q&A, several liberals in the audience came at McAuliffe from the left, giving him the chance to burnish his nutroots credentials. He took the opportunity and ran with it. One asked him why the US is so unpopular with Hugo Chavez, prompting McAuliffe’s BDS affliction to come out in full glory. Keep in mind that Chavez is turning all of Venezuela into an armed camp as he cozies up to the Iranian mullahs and turns himself into a clone of Fidel Castro. Keep in mind that Chavez calls himself an enemy of the US, and keep in mind that Chavez currently rules Venezuela by dictatorial decree as he nationalizes (a fancy way of saying “steals”) private companies. Keep in mind that Chavez was kept in power, in all likelihood, by a sham election certified real by Jimmy Carter. Keeping all of that in mind, McAuliffe actually blamed Chavez’s actions and attitudes on George W. Bush.

Which, if he’s being logically consistent, means Castro is entirely the fault of John F. Kennedy.

This is where Democrats earn the “blame America first” tag. Chavez is, to any rational mind, responsible for his own misbehavior. Chavez is just the latest in a very long line of anti-American Communists who bash us to make a name for themselves and to get their own people worked up over an external enemy. American presidents have dealt with tinpots like Chavez since Thomas Jefferson went after the Barbary Pirates. There’s nothing particularly new about Chavez, he’s just another ankle biting nuisance who might make himself dangerous. Blaming Chavez on Bush is beyond unserious and verges on the insane. Yet there was Terry McAuliffe on the stage, blaming Chavez on Bush. On Chavez McAuliffe put himself to the left of Charlie Rangel, who at least had the good sense to criticize Chavez for calling Bush “the devil” a few months back.

The other strange thing about this is, just who does McAuliffe think he’s pleasing by making Chavez out to be the good guy? Is there a major Hugo hugging segment of the Democrat party? It’s just bizarre to me that a supposedly centrist Democrat would take Chavez’s side against any sitting US president. That’s Harry Belafonte stuff, not what a supposedly serious political thinker would come up with.

I guess the flaw in that thinking is that McAuliffe can be called lots of things, but “serious” isn’t one of them. He is a cheerleader and a fundraiser, not a policy wonk. Throughout his speech, he offered exactly one solution to the plague of terrorism–talking to people who want to blow us up–and he offered exactly one idea to drive the Democrat agenda–Hillarycare II. His is a party that is essentially bereft of ideas. They want out of Iraq without regard to what will happen next, and they want all Republicans humiliated and defeated. Beyond that, they got nuthin’.

It was after the speech that I shook his hand. Ian and I spent a few minutes chatting with a couple of conservatives who also survived the speech, and then proceeded to get out of the building. Who was standing atop the stairs, talking with students before heading out to the street? Why, Terry Mac himself. So I got his attention, called him a “good sport” and shook his hand. He told us he’d have to sue the school if I post the video, which really isn’t my problem but word given, the video (which isn’t all that exciting anyway) stays offline. Then he went one way and we went the other. Down the hall a ways, he called out “It’ll be an interesting 2008!”

We last saw the great man of the people in his sleek black limousine, heading who knows where, while we allegedly rich Republicans made our way out in my 9 year old midsize.

***

MORE (Ian): Here’s what I asked McAuliffe:

“Last week former Speaker of the House and possible Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich admitted having an extra-marital affair while he was attacked President Clinton for having one of his own. Several years ago you complained about Bush’s possible investment in Enron. However, in under 18 months you were able to make a $100,000 investment into a $1,800,000 gain in a company called named “Global Crossing.” Would you care to explain?”

First, I got the expected run around and then the Bush bashing. To make a long story short, he accused Bush of insider trading, in his case. However, when it came to his own actions he said his investment in Global Crossing was an “angel investment.” An angel investment, if you didn’t know, which I was also “educated” on, is when you invest in a start up company hoping to make a profit. Apparently he thought he “got me” by “admitting” not knowing exactly what an angel investment is.

Anyways, he said there is no proof that he made a so-called $1,800,000 profit. So, I asked him “did you did you not” and he denied it. Ha!

I was hissed at, booed, called a “smart ass” by the audience. But it was all worth it because Terry was anerved and Tom Schaller, the liberal professor and author of “Whistlin’ Past Dixie: How The Democrats Can Win Without the South” went insane!


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Did you guys shower afterwards?

Mr. Bingley on March 15, 2007 at 9:02 AM

(In Spicoli’s voice): “Well, I’ve been thinkin’ about that and if *I’m here AND *you’re* here, doesn’t that make him *OUR* fault?”

The guy’s a lefty socialist, Terry, should’nt you be giving Bush CREDIT for Chavez, instead of blame?

Tony737 on March 15, 2007 at 9:04 AM

Great story, Brian/Ian. I think you are spot on concerning the democrat party being bereft of ideas. One thing that caught my interest leading up to last Novembers elections, was how the democrats had the answer to everything. When asked what they plan to do with Iraq, there answer was “We have a plan!” I never heard that plan detailed though. When FoxNews asked them what their plan was in detail, there answer again was, “We have a plan!”

Here it is mid-March, and I am still waiting for “the plan”. After failed non-binding resolutions and general carping, the left still has no idea what their “plan” is. This does not come as a surprise to me, but it has to make you wonder why more and more people aren’t calling them on it…

rightside on March 15, 2007 at 9:09 AM

He is a cheerleader and a fundraiser, not a policy wonk.

No, he’s a snake oil salesman.

when it came to his own actions he said his investment in Global Crossing was an “angel investment.”

McAuliffe only profited from his “angel investment” after selling his soul to the devil.

fogw on March 15, 2007 at 9:15 AM

God bless you Ian for getting Mr. Schaller all hot and bothered. He is well remembered around these parts for his stint on a local radio show as a guest of a conservative host. Many a day I wanted to rip the radio out of my car so as not to here his crazy rants. Just kidding of course but I did rediscover FM during my ride home from work. He finally disappeared, presumably to write his books, but he was not missed.

As for Terry, well I’m sure he could afford to lie when you were so outnumbered. The rest of the crowd surely wouldn’t think to ask such questions of the “elite” of their party. And I, like Bryan, would still have voted for Bush simply because the “other” choice was so poor. Sorry I missed it last night for no other reason than solidarity with my fellow conservatives.

JohnnyD on March 15, 2007 at 9:36 AM

He should have asked who supported Bush.

tomas on March 15, 2007 at 9:47 AM

Personally, I want to thank Mr. McAuliffe for threatening to sue if the video gets posted. If I never have to see his ugly mug again my life will be better for it. The man makes my blood boil.

Thanks Bryan and Ian for doing to dirty work of actually sitting through that and reporting on it. It’s a job most Americans won’t do. May I see your papers, please?

pistolero on March 15, 2007 at 9:54 AM

He isn’t the enemy. The Republican party is feeding on itself. It is good reporting though.

tomas on March 15, 2007 at 9:57 AM

Last night I shook the hand of Terry McAuliffe. Believe me, I’m not saying that to brag. To say that I’m not a fan is an understatement. I’m just saying it to note that it’s possible to shake hands with someone that you disagree with across the board without being uncivilized.

I really need to work on that. Anyway enough of my shortcomings.

Great article Bryan. Great questioning Ian, I wish I could have seen it. This rich conservative is going to get into a 12 year old full size and go to work. *Mental note: Find out what angle investments are, must make money the McAulffie way…*

Theworldisnotenough on March 15, 2007 at 10:03 AM

I don’t get why they would sue if the video got on line and why BP backed down? Shouldn’t have given your word. Maybe you could still frame it and put the text under what was said. Like a slide show. No video or audio. :)

Drtuddle on March 15, 2007 at 10:06 AM

“I’m just saying it to note that it’s possible to shake hands with someone that you disagree with across the board without being uncivilized.”

You, sir, are a better man than I am. I do not feel the same way about this this lying sack of Clinton sh*t.

I believe that this human turd belongs in prison for the Global Crossing looting and bankruptcy along with former CEO and founder Gary Winnick. He was Clinton’s bag man at Global Crossing.

And in case you didn’t know about this band of thieves (AKA, the Global Crossing Officers and senior management), here is a cite from wikipedia (a noted leftist source, BTW):

Global Crossing’s rapid rise and fall attracted tremendous attention and it was quickly revealed that the company, particularly its executives, lavishly spent money on “themselves and their digs.” Four of Global Crossing’s CEOs received at least $23 million in personal loans from the company, some of which were forgiven entirely even when bankruptcy was becoming a greater possibility. These same CEOs also received over $13.5 million in after-tax signing bonuses along with a slew of stock options. Between 1998 and 2001, Winnick sold approximately $420 million in Global Crossing stock. Other executives with the company sold an additional $900 million, totaling $1.3 billion, an amount equal to the Enron inside sales for the same period.[3]

Pacific Capital Group, Winnick’s investment company, was the owner of Global Crossing’s palatial office space in Beverly Hills, California. PCG had paid $41.5 million for the office space in 1998 and spent an additional $9 million on renovations. Global Crossing, its newest “tenant” paid rent to PCG of $400,000 a month. Winnick’s personal office, called the “Oval Office,” contained furniture priced at over $1 million, and hanging outside the entrance to the office was a painting by Pablo Picasso, purchased for $15 million. The Beverly Hills office was not the only extravagant office space – Global Crossing’s office in New York City, located at 88 Pine Street, underwent an extensive renovation. David Walsh, founder of IXNet (which Global Crossing purchased in February, 2000 for $3.4 billion), headed the Manhattan office and was acting Chief Operating Officer. Walsh oversaw the installation of a custom-made lighting system to emulate fiber optic strands with neon lighting. A staircase linking the 29th and 30th floors, installed but then changed at a cost of $250,000, was acknowledged openly by Walsh.

Additionally, Global Crossing operated five corporate jets, including a Boeing 737, a Challenger, a Gulfstream, an Astra and a seven-seater, when, according to one former executive, it needed two jets maximum. Employees reported reckless spending in other areas as well, including the purchase of new accounting software costing $150 million when accounting department staff indicated the current software did not need updating. It was later discovered the software was never even installed.

Gary Winnick’s spending was criticized and he was condemned by many employees, many of whom had losses beyond their jobs when the company filed bankruptcy. Even as the company’s financial situation went from questionable to grim, work continued on Winnick’s Bel Air mansion, valued at $92 million and considered the most expensive home purchased in Los Angeles (and by some reports, American) history.

As for lie-pig McAulliffe’s bullsh*t denial about how he made his windfall profit, Wikipedia also says:

Winnick helped Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe turn a $100,000 stock investment into $18,000,000. Winnick later gave a million dollars to President Clinton’s presidential library.

georgej on March 15, 2007 at 10:13 AM

McAuliffe is a thuggish punk and criminal. The dude is lucky not to be in prison.

If Bush were so evil, he would be.

What a loathsome PoS.

JammieWearingFool on March 15, 2007 at 10:28 AM

The other strange thing about this is, just who does McAuliffe think he’s pleasing by making Chavez out to be the good guy?

The Democrat base.

Enrique on March 15, 2007 at 10:34 AM

Re the video, it’s not that I backed down. A university official approached me very politely after the event and said that the school’s contract with McAuliffe for the event specified that there would be no cameras allowed. The school failed to publicize that restriction, or I wouldn’t have brought a camera. So I respected their contract, no big deal.

Bryan on March 15, 2007 at 10:36 AM

So I respected their contract, no big deal.

I appreciate your respect for the contract. If the roles were reversed, a liberal would not have thought twice about posting the video.

It’s kinda like liberals leaking classified information. Illegal? Yes. The End always justifies the Means.

SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER!

natesnake on March 15, 2007 at 10:50 AM

Cover-Up!!! TerryGate!!! I want the video! :)

JayHaw Phrenzie on March 15, 2007 at 10:52 AM

Great reporting Bryan. We need more of this – we need to be out there front and center the way the left is b/c the MSM will do any/everything to get their socialist leaders in power in 2008. BTW: *off topic* My sister and I wandered into your panel discussion (with Brietbart) at CPAC on Saturday 3/3 and it was probably the most enlightening thing I’d heard all weekend – very eye-opening. My sister started taking notes. Tried to thank you for everything, but you scampered off. Sorry to go off-topic here. Keep it up. We will need you more than ever in the coming months.

foxforce91 on March 15, 2007 at 11:02 AM

You’re a better man than I am, Bryan–I’ve been wanting to punch Terry McAuliffe in the face for about 10 years now, just for being such a smug, lying c*cks*ck*r every time he was on TV. Now I know that he’s exactly the same in person. (In all fairness, and unlike Howard Dean, he actually got out and worked on behalf of his party as DNC chair, but I suspect that he’s an attention whore so it’s not like he wasn’t getting anything out of it.)

As for the corruption with Global Crossing–handsomely repaid in Clinton Adult Bookstore Library donations, well, he’s a Clinton crony, so naturally he’s as dirty as they come. It reminds me a lot of Hillary’s cattle futures, or Dingy Harry’s land deal, etc., etc. It always amazes me how Democrats can profess to admire human slime like these people.

ReubenJCogburn on March 15, 2007 at 11:19 AM

Things like this are always stupid. But I’m just waiting to see the hypocrisy of the people here. D’Souza says 9/11 was America’s fault and you guys eat it up. McAuliffe says Hugo Chavez is Bush’s fault and let the arrows fly.

Nonfactor on March 15, 2007 at 11:29 AM

D’Souza says 9/11 was America’s fault and you guys eat it up.

You’re insane. D’Souza has been roundly criticized all over the right for his ludicrous book. Our friend Robert Spencer debated D’Souza at CPAC. We don’t subscribe to the lefties-made-them-do-it thesis, at all, and never have.

Bryan on March 15, 2007 at 11:33 AM

Is D’Souza representing anyone’s campaign at the moment?

foxforce91 on March 15, 2007 at 11:42 AM

Great read. It’s nice to see someone with a differing point of view enter (bravely, I might add) into that particular echo chamber.

The only itty-bitty thing I’d throw out is (and this is in the form of a question, since I’m slightly unclear – and I know it might be nit-picking):

Which, if he’s being logically consistent, means Castro is entirely the fault of John F. Kennedy.

Wouldn’t Castro be the fault of Eisenhower? If memory serves, JFK inherited the Bay of Pigs strategy.

yo on March 15, 2007 at 11:48 AM

Which, if he’s being logically consistent, means Castro is entirely the fault of John F. Kennedy.

Bryan, I’m shocked, I thought you knew better by now. Kennedy was a Democrat. Only Republicans can be responsible for bad things, not Democrats. Dems want to save the world, and live in peace and harmony.

amerpundit on March 15, 2007 at 11:57 AM

He is a cheerleader and a fundraiser, not a policy wonk.

He is also a PUNK!

PinkyBigglesworth on March 15, 2007 at 12:06 PM

D’Souza has been roundly criticized all over the right for his ludicrous book.

Bryan on March 15, 2007 at 11:33 AM

Good.

Nonfactor on March 15, 2007 at 12:12 PM

Is there a major Hugo hugging segment of the Democrat party?

Actually, yes. I used to live in a neighborhood full of ’em. You know: Free heating oil for the poor, opposing Bushitler, yada, yada. One even sent out a neighborhood email trying to organize everyone into buying exclusively at Hugo’s local Citgo (which she kept so-well-informedly calling “Citco”), and to boycott the Exxon across the street since they’d never paid their (uh, still in court) Valdez fines, etc., etc.

eeyore on March 15, 2007 at 12:19 PM

I’m just saying it to note that it’s possible to shake hands with someone that you disagree with across the board without being uncivilized.

This statement coming a few days after you threw Ann Coulter overboard and a day after you dis-owned President Bush is just laughable. This will be the last post of yours i waste my time on.

forged rite on March 15, 2007 at 5:02 PM

Terry McAuliffe looks pretty good.
For having just slithered out from under a rock.
He always reminds me of the stereotypical union boss.

Speakup on March 15, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Blaming Chavez on Bush is beyond unserious and verges on the insane.

The Democrat base.

Enrique on March 15, 2007 at 10:34 AM

Oh, how I wish that this unserious and insane base would be forced to live under the Chavez regime for at least one year, not knowing that they could ever return. If I had Warren Buffet’s money, I’d create a foundation for that purpose. Best lesson ever – to be cured for life after that!

How silly of the left to think that we’d regret not voting for Mr. Haughty. It’s not like we had a choice between super-smart and brilliant, but given what it was, no contest. Mr. Bush’s power in the next 2 years derives from two sources: the ridicule from the Left + the puerile behaviour from the Congress (both sides).

Entelechy on March 15, 2007 at 5:23 PM

Down the hall a ways, he called out “It’ll be an interesting 2008!”

It sure will – and he won’t be happy. He’ll just have to transition syndromes.

Entelechy on March 15, 2007 at 5:39 PM

Why is it that whenever I see his picture I always think of coke and hookers?

RW Wacko on March 15, 2007 at 5:58 PM

This will be the last post of yours i waste my time on.

I haven’t thrown anyone overboard. I call ’em like I see em. But see ya!

Bryan on March 15, 2007 at 8:04 PM

Good stuff Bryan & Ian.
I don’t envy you the experience though.

Is there a major Hugo hugging segment of the Democrat party?

In a word: YES.

LegendHasIt on March 15, 2007 at 8:37 PM

I bow to your bravado Ian :)

Bryan- Doesn’t Joseph Kennedy have some bearing on this as well?

Pam on March 15, 2007 at 9:51 PM

Someone tell this guy he was not only fired from the dnc position but he’s doing a very lousy job at mrs. clinton’s election.

When he talks you wonder why he was ever in charge of the DNC..but then they put in howard dean so maybe they are just all insane.

Highrise on March 16, 2007 at 4:02 AM

I’m still trying to understand why this article is about the chavez comment and not about the fact that he used the threat of a lawsuit to stop the free flow of information. I don’t get that.

One Angry Christian on March 18, 2007 at 11:01 AM