Back to Home Page

Karl Rove to visit Central Oregon

by In the news Monday, February 22. 2010

Karl Rove Coming to Bend for Oregon REAGAN PAC Keynote Address and Book Signing

Bend, OR- Oregon REAGAN PAC will host Karl Rove, former Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff to President George W. Bush, and current political analyst to Fox News, Newsweek, and the Wall Street Journal, in Bend for a fundraising dinner and book tour event. The event will take place beginning at 5:30 pm on April 16, 2010 at the Riverhouse Convention Center. “We are extremely honored to have Mr. Rove visit Bend on his book tour. It’s not often that we have the opportunity to have one of the country’s most politically influential and sought after speakers in Bend,” said Tim Knopp, Oregon REAGAN PAC Chairman. “We have been working hard to bring the Reagan coalition that won Oregon back together in what we believe will be an historic election cycle in 2010. The Kick-off event for Oregon REAGAN PAC is a Tribute Gala to President Ronald Reagan.”

“Oregon REAGAN PAC welcomes those from any registered party, whether they are Constitution, Independent, Democrat, Libertarian or Republican, who believe in the U.S. Constitution and the Reagan principles that took our country out of the last deep recession to the greatest economic expansion in modern times. We also welcome those who have given up and are no longer registered to vote if they want to be a part of something truly special and historic in 2010″, added Knopp.

The evening will feature a keynote address by Mr. Rove and a book signing during which attendees will be given the chance to have him sign his new memoir, “Courage and Consequence, My Life as a Conservative in the Fight.” Cost to attend is $50 per person and includes dinner and silent auction.

No related posts.

Posted by at 03:28 | Posted in Measure 37 | 16 Comments | Email This Post | Print This Post
Back to Home Page
  • valley p

    Not to be missed. Karl Rove making money telling us all about the most failed administration in American history. Maybe he will take some responsibility?

    • Steve Plunk

      What a load of leftist nonsense. You’re entitled to your own opinions but the facts are very different.

      • valley p

        Leftist nonsense? The facts are different? Can you think of any 8 year American presidency after which the wealth of the nation was lower at the end than the beginning? A president who came in with a budget surplus and went out with a 1.4 trillion deficit after doubling the national debt? A president who left office with 2 ongoing unresolved wars? A 24% public approval rating? I can’t either. We just had a lost decade economically and we can’t ever get that back. That is quite an accomplishment, and Rove should take his share of the credit.

        • Steve Plunk

          I know the current president is creating much more debt and doing irreparable damage to the economy. The Iraq war was resolved (that’s a funny way to put it) when Bush left and Obama is following closely to the Bush way of doing things in Afghanistan. Both wars were precipitated by 9/11 and both were approved by Congress. Approval ratings? How’s our current president doing one year in?

          You can give a one sided argument all you want but it doesn’t tell the whole story.

          • valley p

            Obama is following the Bush way in Afghanistan? You have to be kidding me. He has tripled the number of troops, convinced the Pakistanis to take on the Taliban, and has taken the initiative. Where Bush was losing Obama now seems to be winning.

            Iraq was definitely not resolved when Obama came in. However, the tide was turned under Bush and Obama has managed to build on that.

            Obama’s approval ratings one year in are almost exactly where Reagan’s and Clinton’s were, and they both ended up pretty well.

            As for the debt, time will tell. But my analysis of the Bush record is not one sided. It is reality based.

          • Steve Plunk

            Obama fought the idea of a surge for quite a while before finally giving in. The success of the surge in Iraq is what prompted this to be considered in Afghanistan. Remember it was the generals who proposed the surge and Obama took months to approve it.

          • dartagnan

            “I know what I know so don’t confuse me with the facts,” eh?

            If the Iraq war was “resolved” by the time Bush left office, why do we still have 100,000 troops there?

          • Steve Plunk

            We still have troops in Germany, Japan, Korea, and many other places. Your definition of resolved is different than mine obviously. Iraq is stabilizing and has been for some time.

          • valley p

            Yes. It is stabilizing. Bush deserves some credit for taking us out on the surge limb against our better judgment, and Obama deserves some credit for sticking with the program instead of pulling out more quickly.

            Back to economics. Can you name any 2-term president in the history of the nation with a worse across the board record than Bush? Negative net national wealth. Negative net jobs. Negative stock market. Doubled national debt. Increased poverty. Decrease in median incomes. Financial crisis. Squandered budget surplus.

            Think long and hard and do some research before answering.

          • Steve Plunk

            Since my statements concerning Bush’s war record are vindicated perhaps someone else should do more research. BTW, I won’t play your name the whatever game.

            Bush’s economic record is one of overcoming one disaster and catching the housing bubble/stock market crash/oil bubble at the end of his term. None of those were his fault and his reaction to each was reasonable. He did leave us with a war debt but it was a necessary war and approved by congress as well as supported by a majority of the country.

            The government has an effect on the economy but doesn’t make the economy what it is or isn’t. Blame for success or failure depends usually on your politics. The cyclical nature of the economy meant the stock market would go down and the housing bubble would burst. The oil price run up started the dominoes falling. With a wealth transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars to oil producing states it was a catalyst for recession. Trying to blame Bush will not work. History will show his stewardship during difficult times was above average at the very least.

          • valley p

            “Since my statements concerning Bush’s war record are vindicated perhaps someone else should do more research. BTW, I won’t play your name the whatever game.”

            I would say 1/2 vindicated. The Iraq war was a boondoggle to begin with. In the end Bush threw a hail Mary from his own end zone and it connected at the 50. On Afghanistan the war began well and went rapidly downhill due to shifting resources to Iraq. Bush left that one hanging on for dear life when he left office. So at best Bush was 2 out of 4 as a war president.

            As for someone doing more research, don’t hold your breath. Bush was in a class all by himself.
            Excusing him on the economy by pretending government has little effect is fascinating. I guess that means Reagan was just lucky on timing and Measures 66 and 67 will have zero effect on Oregon business. Bush average after long retrospect? I hope you are very young.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            >If the Iraq war was “resolved” by the time Bush left office, why do we still have 100,000 troops there?

            Because wars take time to end, they dont all fit into your MTV time frame.

            Remember, Bush inherited an abysmal sirtuation from Clinton in Iraq. They were openly firing upon our planes there, sponsoring terrorism in Israel and doing every thing they could to convince the world ( and every major intelligence agency in the world by the way )they had WMD’s.

            You expect that resolved in 7 years? With a congress openly trying to hamper the effort? Good luck with that.

        • Rupert in Springfield

          Well, Clinton would be a good place to start.

          National debt when Clinton takes office – $4,188,092,107,183.60
          National debt when Clinton leaves office – $5,727,776,738,304.64

          >A president who left office with 2 ongoing unresolved wars?

          Eisenhower would be one, Korea still technically at war to this day, Vietnam starting with “divisors”.

          Clinton – Left office with Iraq openly violating terms of surrender, Afganistan at war with us through the Taliban.

          >A 24% public approval rating?

          Nixon was close to it. BO will be there is the economy doesnt improve by the end of the first term.

          >We just had a lost decade economically and we can’t ever get that back.

          Actually the economy was not all that different than under Clinton, at least until Democrats took congress and didn’t listen to the warnings about Fmac and Fmae, which Bush did give to congress, twice.

          Bush inherited an awful situation in terms of Iraq and Afghanistan, did he handle it perfectly? Nope. At least he tried, rather than ignore it and pass it along to the next guy like Clinton did.

          And lets face it, Clinton didn’t really do a thing for that surplus, no one can ever name for me what he cut that resulted in it. The surplus he got was due to three things primarily – military cuts, lower debt cost due to falling rates, fiscal restraint forced on him by a Republican congress.

          We all know the budgets Clinton proposed in 1994 – $300B deficits more for as far as the eye could see.

          Nice try though.

          • valley p

            “You expect that resolved in 7 years?”

            Heck Rupert. That socialist Roosevelt “resolved” Germany and Japan in 4 years. And you have expected Obama to “resolve” a collapsed economy in 1 year. So yes….if Bush was going to start a war he should have “resolved” it a lot sooner.

            “Well, Clinton would be a good place to start.”

            You have tipped over into utter madness. Clinton inherited a massive deficit from Reagan/Bush and in 5 years turned it into a surplus. Did he run an 8 year cumulative surplus? No. But who the hell ever did?

            “Eisenhower would be one, Korea still technically at war to this day”

            Yes. And technically no Americans have died there in many years. Viet nam? Right…whatever.

            “Nixon was close to it. ”

            Hooray. The only president forced to resign from office. That is Bush’s standard of excellence. He was not forced to resign.

            “BO will be there is the economy doesnt improve by the end of the first term.”

            OK…so unresolved war after 7 years for Bush? No big deal. Unrecovered economy for Obama in 4 years. Big deal. At least you are even handed.

            “Actually the economy was not all that different than under Clinton”

            Mary mother of God. Reality stands no chance with you Rupert. You are truly a piece of work that should be studied by experts in the field of denial.

            “Bush inherited an awful situation in terms of Iraq and Afghanistan, did he handle it perfectly? Nope.”

            We agree he did not handle it perfectly. First he allowed the nation to be attacked. Then he staged a pretty decent invasion of Afghanistan. Then he felt his oats and decided to take out a country that had not attacked us, and was zero threat. Then things sort of went very downhill. Yes. Definitely not perfect.

            “And lets face it, Clinton didn’t really do a thing for that surplus, no one can ever name for me what he cut that resulted in it.”

            No…not a thing. he didn’t raise taxes on the rich. He didn’t managed 8 years of sustained economic growth. He just picked his nose and got a few blow jobs. No big deal. Anyone could have done what he did. You are absolutely right Rupert.

          • dartagan

            “Mary mother of God. Reality stands no chance with you Rupert.”

            You just figured that out?

          • valley p

            Rupert always had a slim tether to reality, but even that seems to have snapped off over the past few weeks. Equating the Clinton and Bush economies is perhaps the final step. And he can’t seem to even track facts from one day to the next anymore. I would be worried about him if I actually cared about him. Maybe I should worry about his family?

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)