http://www.msnbc.msn...

http://video.msn.com...=

Is Saddam our Hitler?
Aug. 30: “Hardball� guest host Norah O’Donnell talks to GOP Chairman Ken Mehlman about the administration’s attack on war critics.
• WATCH VIDEO  (08:37)

http://video.msn.com...

Ken Mehlman is wrong about many facts and about how he negatively defines people but he is a very slick speaker and he can sound very convincing to people who are not aware of the real facts in my opinion!

Democrats and Democratic candidates have got to know what top GOP grassroots leaders like Ken Mehlman and Rush Limbaugh are telling many millions of people (even though it is not very fun to hear what they are saying) if they are going to have the best possible chances of taking back power in at least one branch of Congress from a very desperate GOP in the 2006 elections!

The GOP Neocons are very organized in their own media and rapid response efforts so we have to be as well. Just look for yourself at a small part of what they are doing:

http://www.newsbuste...

Here is the transcript of the MSNBC Hardball video above so that you can see exactly what Ken Mehlman and the RNC are telling people and see the main talking points that they are using to help us combat them more effectively:

http://www.msnbc.msn...

'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for August 30
Read the transcript to the Wednesday show

Guests: Evan Thomas, Roger Simon, Ken Mehlman

NORAH O‘DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: Tonight, in a rare interview, President Bush talks to “NBC Nightly News� anchor Brian Williams about the political damage from Hurricane Katrina and Iraq.

Plus the chairman of the Republican Party on Donald Rumsfeld‘s fighting words against war critics. Let‘s play HARDBALL.

Good evening. I‘m Norah O‘Donnell sitting in for Chris Matthews. Welcome to HARDBALL. Tonight, President Bush hit the campaign trail and talked about his upcoming series of speeches to try and counter critics on the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My series of speeches, they‘re not political speeches. They‘re speeches about the future of this country, and they are speeches to make it clear that if we retreat before the job is done, this nation will become even more in jeopardy.

These are important times, and I would seriously hope people wouldn‘t politicize these issues that I‘m going to talk about. We have a duty in this country to defeat terrorists. That‘s why we will stay on the offense to bring them to justice before they hurt us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O‘DONNELL: But first, we begin with the chairman of the Republican Party, Ken Mehlman. You heard the president just earlier today say that he is not engaged in political speeches. But over the past several days, we have heard the vice president, the secretary of defense, and Condoleezza Rice take on critics of this administration.

And in fact, Secretary Rumsfeld yesterday�in what some say is some of the toughest language to date�has said those that criticize the president and his policies are essentially equivalent to Nazi-era appeasers. Here‘s what the secretary said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF STATE: Indeed, in the decades before World War II, a great many argued that the fascist threat was exaggerated or that it was someone else‘s problem. I recount that history, because once again, we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O‘DONNELL: How was the decision made to start using that term, Islamic fascism?

KEN MEHLMAN, CHAIRMAN, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CMTE.: Well, I can‘t explain why Secretary Rumsfeld used it. I‘ve used it too. I think it‘s very much accurate, and here‘s why, I think, it is important to explain it in those terms.

What we face today is a movement that‘s united by ideology and that‘s empowered by technology, and the American people need to understand that. You know, when we faced previous enemies, we often faced a nation state, and so if you eliminated the barracks or eliminated command and control, you were safe.

But the fact is, Hezbollah and Hamas and al Qaeda and some of the jihadists that are in Iraq now are united by a common ideology, an ideology that is, obviously, incredibly threatening not just to America, but to civilization and to free people everywhere.

And it is important that people understand when you are fighting a movement and you‘re fighting an ideology, that very much affects your tactics and it explains why this is a challenging war to win.

O‘DONNELL: But why has this fascism become the new word for the Republican Party, with just 10 weeks before Election Day?

MEHLMAN: Well, I think it‘s a very apt description of what we face. The fact is, like earlier fascists�there were fascists in Italy and there were fascists in Nazi Germany�here are folks who want to subordinate the freedom all over the place. They want to take on ...

O‘DONNELL: But I‘ve talked to you several times and talked to other administration officials, and you have said publicly, look, listen, it‘s good to have a good, healthy debate about the Iraq war and the way forward.

MEHLMAN: It is.

O‘DONNELL: So why then now this change where you have called this Islamic fascism, but now you are calling those who oppose or differ from the president‘s policies essentially appeasers.

MEHLMAN: Well, I don‘t think that‘s what I heard Secretary Rumsfeld say. I think what he said�and if you, again, look at history, the fact is that back in the 1930s, Winston Churchill was a lone voice and what he said is, if we don‘t stop Hitler back before he rearmed, back before he took the Rhineland, before he had the Anschluss, before he got parts of Czechoslovakia, if we don‘t stop him, it will be too late, and we learned from that history.

O‘DONNELL: And is there any indication that Saddam Hussein wanted that kind of hegemonic power in the Middle East?

MEHLMAN: There is indication that Saddam Hussein had�used WMD on his own people on a regular basis, supported suicide bombers on a regular basis, shot at American planes, invaded his neighbors. And if we didn‘t�if we waited for him to reestablish his program, which the folks who looked at it said he was working to be do, we would be less safe. It‘s a very apt analogy.

What we did what Saddam Hussein was exactly what Winston Churchill urged the world to do with respect to Adolf Hitler, which was, from a historical perspective, to make sure we dealt with the threat before it grew and before it fully materialized.

O‘DONNELL: But there are some interesting things that happened today and that clip we showed of the president earlier today, he called the press corps. You know, the president doesn‘t normally like to speak to members of the press. He did grant an interview to Brian Williams. But he specifically called the White House pool to make that comment.

I‘m not making any political speeches, even though we know the president is going to address the American Legion tomorrow and make a very political speech about the war on terror.

We‘ve also heard the vice president and secretary of defense essentially road testing a lot of themes that the Republican Party wants to use coming up to the November elections.

Is this appropriate, this kind of black and white, and then critiquing those who critique the administration by calling them self-defeating pessimists, appeasers, as obstacles to national security as Karl Rove�your mentor�has called Democrats?

MEHLMAN: I think that, again, the American people are going to face a very important choice in 69 days. The fact is that America is at war. We know we‘re at war. We saw it in the London bombing, we see it in other plots that have been revealed. We see it in the Hezbollah missiles that fell on northern Israel. We are involved in a global war.

And the fundamental question is, do you want leaders who understand we are at war and who want the tools to win the war? Less than a year after 9/11, Nancy Pelosi said this is not really a war. And, unfortunately, even without respect to Iraq, the Patriot Act, a majority of Democrats voted yes.

O‘DONNELL: Ken, but you are now calling opponents and critics of this administration Nazi-era appeasers.

MEHLMAN: I‘m not calling them anything.

O‘DONNELL: The secretary of defense did, and this is a coordinated message coming out of the White House and the Republican National Committee. Your candidates are also using that same message. If the majority of the American people now oppose the war in Iraq, are you essentially saying that they are Nazi-era appeasers?

MEHLMAN: Absolutely not, but what we are saying, which is critical to remember, is not according to me, not according to Secretary Rumsfeld, not according to the president of the vice president.

According to Ayman al-Zawahiri, the number two guy in al Qaeda, their goal is to use Iraq as a base like they used Afghanistan to launch attacks on America and other free nations to establish what he called a global caliphate. Unlike Afghanistan, it is the number two oil producer in the world, and it sits in between Iran and Syria.

O‘DONNELL: That still doesn‘t excuse what Democrats would say, which is a lack of a plan for Iraq and going into a war for all the wrong reasons.

MEHLMAN: Well, but here‘s the fundamental question. There‘s no question�first of all, they supported the war. But the fundamental question is, what do we now?

And on the key question of what we do now, if you believe�which Jack Murtha and a majority of Democrats believe�that there ought to be a timetable that is politically driven, not militarily driven, what you‘re saying is, unfortunately, that you are going to give the terrorists a big victory. But let me just finish by ...

O‘DONNELL: But what‘s happening is as this new rhetoric has emerged, though, it also comes at a time when there are some moderate Republican candidates who are actually�have similar messages to the Democrats or who are at least pulling away from President Bush.

You have Congressman Chris Shays, the Republican from out of Connecticut -- 14th visit to Iraq, just came back. He‘s was one of the most stalwart supporters of the president on this war. Came back and said it is now time for a timetable.

MEHLMAN: Well, I saw Chris�I saw him interviewed on this show, Chris Shays, and he, in fact, said something very different than what the Democrats say. What he has said is we need to make sure that there are benchmarks established for the Iraqi people to stand up.

O‘DONNELL: He said a timeline.

MEHLMAN: Well, but he did not say there ought to be a military timeline. There is a very big difference. And, again ...

O‘DONNELL: Then let me ask you about Pennsylvania Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick who recently sent out a campaign mailing rejecting both extremes, President Bush‘s stay the course approach and a cut and run approach. So you have moderate candidates that are Republicans that don‘t want to run on this message that you have got the secretary of defense delivering, that the president is delivering.

MEHLMAN: Well, I don‘t think our approach is stay the course. As I indicated�I was on “Meet the Press� about a week-and-a-half ago. Our approach is to adapt to win. One of the reasons you have seen some violence go down in the past few weeks, is we adapted by adding more troops into Baghdad. We did the same thing before the third successful election. We changed how we train people.

The fact is, we must constantly adapt, because this is an enemy that is a movement. And it‘s an enemy that, because of technological forces, has an ability to recruit people on the Internet, to establish�to build IEDs based on what they learn on the Internet. It requires us to constantly adapt and be smart.

And what we don‘t need to do is what most Democrats would do, which is weaken our ability to have coordination by killing the Patriot Act, reduce the ability to interrogate the enemy, reduce the ability to have surveillance of the enemy that was critical in London.

You look at question after question, beyond Iraq, on issue after issue, most Democrats have taken positions that would surrender key tools we need to win the war on terror, and that would weaken America, and that‘s a very important issue for Americans to think about 69 days before the election.

O‘DONNELL: Finally, I must also note that Bob Novak has a column out that he says that the outlook for Republicans come November is, quote, “pitiful,� that you guys are likely going to lose 25 seats in the House of Representatives. How does that make you feel?

MEHLMAN: I disagree with Bob Novak. I think that if you look at it race by race�I spent yesterday�I had our entire field team in from all over the country, went through race by race, and the way I looked at it today, we would keep both the House and keep both the Senate. And one of the reasons I think we‘re going to keep it is because I don‘t think most Americans at a time we‘re at war are going to want to vote for folks who again and again and again beyond just Iraq, on issue after issue, would surrender the key tools we need, whether it‘s coordination, whether it‘s interrogation, whether it‘s missile defense, whether it‘s surveillance.

O‘DONNELL: And that‘s why there‘s this new coordinated message from the secretary of defense, the vice president and the president tomorrow.

MEHLMAN: Well I‘m not sure why each of them are giving the speeches they are, but I think this is a critical question that the American people ought to think about and it‘s a critical issue for our nation.

O‘DONNELL: Ken Mehlman, chairmam of the Republican National Committee, thank you very much.

MEHLMAN: Thanks.

O‘DONNELL: And when we come back, NBC “Nightly News� anchor Brian Williams one on one interview with President Bush. It‘s a rare, candid look at the president as he heads into the fall election season. You‘re also going to hear what he‘s been reading this summer. You‘re watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MEHLMAN: Well, I don‘t think our approach is stay the course. As I indicated�I was on “Meet the Press� about a week-and-a-half ago. Our approach is to adapt to win.

Ok, so they don't want to "stay the course" anymore. It is more politically expedient now to call it "adapt and win."

Let's see- why is the US in Iraq? Ask tomorrow, for yet another answer. Why should anyone believe these people?

I know that extricating US troops from Iraq will have pitfalls and difficulties. If we wait for them to "stand up before we stand down," however, we might be waiting forever. The protective presence of US forces gives the weak Iraqi government a very good reason to never stand up.