Didn’t catch the Sunday morning talk shows? Luckily the Midterm Roundup did, and this time it means every single minute of every single one. It’s a special Sunday Show Mondo-Roundup. Breaking news! – Political maestro Karl Rove ensures a November 7 GOP victory by announcing, “The midterm elections are not just 8 days away. The midterm elections will not occur this year.”

Sunday Show Mondo-Roundup!

Face the Nation (CBS)

Bob Schieffer had on Representatives John Murtha (D-PA) and Duncan Hunter (R-CA), plus a pair of national party chairmen – Howard Dean (DNC) and Ken Mehlman (RNC). Here’s a transcript of the show (pdf).

Murtha and Hunter debated Iraq. Murtha wants to redeploy the troops, as he has been known to publicize. Plus he thinks the American military is turning against the war. Duncan Hunter thinks otherwise: “John Murtha is wrong.” Hunter thinks the insurgents in Iraq are actually going to hasten America’s victorious return home. When Schieffer asked him how long he thinks it will take for the Iraqi army to become strong enough for American troops to finally step down, Hunter responded:

I think it’s going to happen pretty quick. And part of it, ironically, is the insurgents themselves. You take a battalion of Iraqi soldiers and move them into Baghdad, where they get a taste of combat, where they learn unit cohesiveness, they learn leadership, they learn chain of command – they’re going to become an operational military a lot faster than if they’re in a benign environment. So I think that moving these Iraqi battalions in a large number into the fight is going to produce those folks a lot faster. And you know, once again. Bob, one two three. We stood up the government, we stand up the military, we leave.

OK, the Roundup seems to have misplaced its logic textbook, but considering that the insurgency is the reason American troops remain in Iraq today, it’s allllllmost positive that Hunter is committing some sort of fallacy with that argument. It’s gonna go with “circular stupidity,” or as Aristotle called it, “circulus ignorantiam.”

When Ken Mehlman came on, Schieffer didn’t take long to question him on “the ad.” Now Mehlman is crying out for the independent expenditure law to be changed. Schieffer calls his explanation “lame.”

MEHLMAN: And that’s the reason the law needs to be changed. I talked to Senator McCain and I’ve talked to Senator McConnell, both of whom have been on different sides of the campaign reform issue, and they both agree that a law which says that the Republican National Committee pays for the ad, but that it’s also illegal for the chairman of the RNC or the political director of the RNC or the communications director of the RNC to see the ad, approve of the ad or take the ad down.

SCHIEFFER: But – but Mr. Mehlman, the logic of that, if I think something’s wrong, but I take advantage of a law that allows me to take advantage of that? I mean… that’s pretty lame if I may say so.

Yeah Bob! Schieffer went on to badger Mehlman a little more on the pointlessness of decrying an ad and a law after the ad has run its course and taken its effect, though predictably made little headway against the brick wall Mehlman.

Mehlman then went on to hit the typical Republican fear points, which Arianna Huffington covers here.

Howard Dean didn’t say anything too eye-opening, refuting Mehlman’s reasons for Americans to vote Republican and echoing Murtha’s call for a change of course in Iraq, though Dean couched his rhetoric in pragmatic terms – a potential Democratic victory on Election Day would not mean an immediate withdrawal. More than anything it would simply put increased pressure on Bush to develop benchmarks and a real, practical plan. Wash Times has more with Party chiefs debate voter motivation.

Meet the Press (NBC)

Cardin vs. Steele MTP Debate Recap!

AP: Md. Senate Rivals Spar on Iraq, Abortion: “Rivals in Maryland's closely watched Senate race sparred over Iraq, abortion and stem cell research on Sunday, with the Republican saying the war is ‘a mess’ and states should decide abortion rights.”

WaPo: Debate Puts Steele on Defense: “Republican Michael S. Steele struggled to soften his long-held views on touchstone social issues yesterday after being challenged repeatedly on his conservative beliefs during his final televised debate in the campaign for Maryland's open U.S. Senate seat.”

Wash Times: Iraq, Bush focus of Steele-Cardin tilt: “Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele and Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin this morning met in an hour-long, nationally televised debate on "Meet the Press," nine days before voters elect one to the U.S. Senate. In a contest that could be decided by Maryland's black Democratic voting bloc, the issue of race was not raised or mentioned by host Tim Russert.”

More Wash Times: Steele regrets the race issue not mentioned in Cardin debate: “Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele and Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin debated yesterday on national television about the Iraq war, the Republican Party and stem-cell research, but the decisive role that black voters will play in Maryland's U.S. Senate race was not mentioned.”

Baltimore Sun: Cardin and Steele face the nation: “Discussion of the Iraq war dominated the hourlong conversation, but what also emerged were portraits of stylistically distinct lawmakers. Cardin, a staid 10-term Democratic congressman who has struggled in previous debates to rebut Steele's attacks, received less airtime than his Republican rival. Russert honed in instead on the more extroverted but substantively elusive Steele, attempting to pin down his views on controversial social issues.”

And DebateScoop has a liveblog of the debate.

The Roundup would say the Sun had the most astute reaction to the debate. Steele is a way more attractive candidate just in terms of charm and energy, at least in the Roundup’s humble opinion. Besides the fact that Cardin looks vaguely like Sam the Eagle, Steele has a certain laid back, “Hey man, it’s all good, I’m your buddy,” kind of affability. It can be convincing if you let yourself forget just how slippery he is on the actual issues.

A couple additional observations:

This was one of the more mind-numbing “what’s your plan” / “no, what’s your plan” Iraq back and forths the Roundup has witnessed in recent memory. Some excerpts from the transcript:

CARDIN: Mr. Steele has, has presented no plan, I have a plan to change the direction in Iraq… I have a plan that will at least change the direction in Iraq. We need to have a plan brought forward by this administration that starts bringing our troops home and energizes the international community so that we can have a diplomatic and political solution in Iraq…

…

CARDIN: …We need a new plan in Iraq…

…

CARDIN: …And Congress needs to use every option they can, so the president presents, presents a plan. My objective is to get a plan from this administration that…

…

CARDIN: …And if the Democrats get back control of the United States Senate, then the amendments can be presented in a way that could be constructive in getting the president to submit a new plan.

…

STEELE: …The only plan I’ve heard you put on the table is “We need a plan.”… Let’s begin to put the pressure – this is my plan, by the way – let’s begin to put the pressure on the Iraqi government…

…

[Here’s where it gets good…]

CARDIN: …I have come forward with a plan. I’ve come forward with a plan that can work. Mr. Steele, if you look at...

STEELE: What’s the plan?

CARDIN: Well, you – I’ve already expressed it. If you look at what Mr. Steele has done, look on his Web page, try to find his positions on Iraq. A hundred and sixty-eight words, that’s all he devotes, and it’s lost on his Web page. … Doesn’t have a plan, doesn’t even have a consistent position on Iraq. … I have been an outspoken critic of the president in the war against Iraq, and I have put forward a plan in which we could bring our troops home without a time schedule.

STEELE: Well, I, I still, I’m still waiting for the plan, sir. I’m still waiting for the Democrats to lay that plan on the table. I’m still waiting for you to lay that plan on the table. … You’re now saying that, you know, you don’t want to fund the war, that when you get control of the Congress, your vote is going to be to de-fund our, our troops on the ground. That – that’s your plan.

MR. RUSSERT (to Cardin): Give one specific of your plan.

CARDIN: My plan is to start redeploying troops, to show the world that we’re not going to be an occupation force; convene the international community so that we can develop a diplomatic and political solution; use the non-governmental organizations to deliver humanitarian assistance; bring in the international community to help train the troops. Mr. Steele does not have a plan, Mr. Bush does not have a plan. I have come forward with a plan.

…

STEELE: But Mr. Cardin, what does Iraq look like under your plan on the last day the troops are withdrawn?

…

STEELE: If you start with your plan to redeploy the troops and to drawn down…

…

STEELE: …I think what we need to do is make certain that, whether it’s looking at the Biden plan in terms of a trifurcation or looking at a whole Iraq, this is the conversation we need to get into right now that we haven’t. What we have done, ostensibly, for the last three years, is slowly march towards nothing. [Yes, slowly march towards nothing… somewhat reminiscent of… oh, what is it that’s coming to mind…]

…

CARDIN: A systematic plan will give the Iraqis an opportunity to stand up and take responsibility for their own country. A deadline of six months, of withdrawing all of our troops after six months, will leave chaos in Iraq. You have no plan! Read your own Web site: 168 pages. [He meant to say words, presumably.]

STEELE: Well, sir, you’re referring to a Web site. I mean...

CARDIN: Have a plan, have a plan! And we need to implement a plan in order that Iraqis have a best chance of stable government.

Mercifully, Russert changed the topic at that point. Unfortunately by then the Midterm Roundup had already begun slamming its head repeatedly into the nearest wall and was just barely conscious, no doubt affecting its ability to process the remainder of the debate.

But it did catch this one other moment later in the debate – referring to a past bill regarding stem-cell research, Cardin made the mistake of mentioning Rick Santorum’s name:

CARDIN: That bill was a – was put up by the opponents of embryonic stem cell research. The two House sponsors of the bill that, by the way, deals with embryos that would otherwise be discarded, Congresswoman DeGette and Congresswoman — Congressman Castle both voted against it. The advocates for the stem cell research urged us that this would do absolutely nothing to advance embryonic stem cell research. The reason is, quite frankly, that the technique just doesn’t exist. It will advance embryonic stem cell research. It was sponsored in the Senate by Senator Santorum. I don’t think I need to say more than that.

As you might expect, this drew the terrifying ire of Kathryn Jean Lopez: “Cardin throwing out Santorum's name like that is only the tiniest hint of the kind of demagogic glee we'll see from the Left if Santorum loses. It will be an ugly post-Election Day if Santorm [sic] loses – on so many levels. If you think I'm earnest in my support for Santorum, you ain't seen nothing.” She couldn’t quite let it go though, as she was still livid about Ben Cardin’s line a few hours later: “It's been a few hours since I watched the Cardin-Steele debate but I am still livid about Ben Cardin's obnoxious Santorum line.”

This Week (ABC)

George Stephanopoulos had on House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), Michael J. Fox, and actress Sarah Jessica Parker. Parker was on to talk about UNICEF and trick-or-treating. The Roundup is sure it was very touching and that SJP’s makeup looked fabulous.

Boehner predicted victory in the midterm elections, being sure to remind people that national polls mean nothing since the races are individual – local candidates running on local issues and so forth.

The quote probably getting the most attention this morning is Boehner’s estimation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. At a time when Rumsfeld is seemingly willingly acting as the punching bag for any politician, Democrat or Republican, wishing to voice any kind of opposition or disappointment whatsoever with the war in Iraq (the very same morning on MTP Michael Steele, when asked by Tim Russert if Rumsfeld should resign, said, “Well, let’s put it this way: He wouldn’t be my secretary of defense.”), Boehner took a completely opposite approach:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me just ask one more question on this. Your own senators, I said Mike DeWine, thinks Rumsfeld has to go. Do you agree?

BOEHNER: I think Donald Rumsfeld is the best thing that’s happened to the Pentagon in 25 years.

Steph also touched on the Foley scandal. Boehner slipped and slid around, admitting that the GOP had a few bad apples, etc., denying that the House leadership was aware of anything beforehand, and even squeezed in a little moral tough guy posturing: “Foley’s conduct was reprehensible, abhorrent. And if any one of us would have known about this, we would have dragged him out of there by his tie.” Steph didn’t press him too hard on any of it.

The show also held a roundtable featuring WaPo’s E.J. Dionne, TIME’s Washington Bureau Chief Jay Carney, and ABC News' Claire Shipman and George Will to discuss the mid-term elections. You can find the video at Media Matters. Apparently Media Matters wasn’t too impressed by Will’s performance. They didn’t appreciate his comment that the economy was “objectively good,” in regards to how it would influence the elections. And later, the roundtable took a look at “the ad.” George Will asserted that Ken Mehlman “was appalled” by the ad, which, as Media Matters aptly points out, is a patently false statement. No one jumped on him for it at the roundtable.

And then, there was the Michael J. Fox interview…

Think Progress and Crooks and Liars have only partial segments of the interview. You can watch the whole thing at the This Week website.

OK look, the Midterm Roundup finds it entirely impossible to deal with this thing with any semblance of objectivity, so it won’t try to. It’ll just say that no matter who you are, no matter what you think of the issues or the individuals involved, this interview will have some kind of an effect on you. Whatever that effect might be, it’s one worth experiencing. The Roundup seriously, seriously urges you to watch the full interview. Again, whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican, whether you’re for or against embryonic stem cell research, whether you’re a Michael J. Fox fan or a Rush Limbaugh fan, no matter what, just check it out. Seriously.

OK, forgive it, but the Roundup has to include this one excerpt (responding to Rush Limbaugh’s assertion that creating false hope is cruel):

What is crueler? To not have hope or to have hope? And it’s not false hope, it’s a very informed hope. I mean, it’s hope that’s informed by the opinion of our leading scientists, almost to the point of unanimity, that embryonic stem cells, because [inaudible], because they have the capacity to be anything are truly – you know, will it be a straight path to victory? Probably not, probably you’ll have stutter step along the way. In fact, they just did some work where they found it actually relieved the symptoms of Parkinson’s in one test, but there was residue, some tissue residue that built up, which is not ideal. But two steps forward, one step back, you know, it’s a process. It’s how this country was built. It’s, it’s what we do. I don’t want to get too corny about it, but isn’t that what the person in the harbor with the thing [assuming Statue of Liberty pose] – it’s about hope. And so to characterize hope as some kind of malady or some kind of flaw of character or national weakness is, is to me really counter to what this country is about.

OK, sorry, and this one:

Talk about hiding – the notion – this is what struck a nerve. The notion of hiding symptoms is so key to what patients of all kinds of conditions, but particularly Parkinson's – it's the biggest thing we face, is hiding. We have to hide. Don't let anybody see. Don't let them think you're drunk. Don't let them think you're incapable. Don't let them think you're unstable; you're unsteady; you're flawed; you're devalued. Don't let them see that. Mask it. Hide it. Cover it up. You know, it's amazing to – I can't stress enough. I don't want to react personally to these attacks. It's pointless. It's silly. It's like getting in a fight with a bully. What's the point? You're not going to change his mind. You're just probably going to get a nosebleed. So, you know, why bother? But make no mistake, it hurts. And it hurt when – it hurt – it hurt to see the president use the one veto of his administration to strike down this legislation. It was passed through both the houses of the Congress. It had a lot of very – people of very serious conscience proud about it and in their duty as representatives voted for. And to see the president… no.

(FYI Steph said they invited Limbaugh to appear on the program also, even offering to go to him, but he declined. Can’t imagine why.)

Fox News Sunday (FOX News)

Chris Wallace took a look at the Senate races in Tennessee and Pennsylvania, talking to Representative Harold Ford, Jr. (D) and Senator Rick Santorum (R). He also had on Senate campaign committee chiefs Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) to talk about the elections.

Wallace brought up a good point with Harold Ford: “If a Democrat who votes as a conservative on guns, gays, and God can’t win this year in Tennessee, does any Democrat ever have a chance in a red southern state?” Ford replied, “Well that’s why we’re gonna win, to prove that one.”

Hm, let’s see… what else, what else… oh yeah – THE AD??? When Wallace asked Ford whether he thought that the fact that the bimbo in the ad was white was coincidental, Ford replied, “No I think it was smut. I don’t think race had anything to do with that ad. I just think it was an uncalled for, despicable, inappropriate ad for children to be watching at 7 and 8 o’clock central time with their parents after dinner in the living room. They knew it was bad. The party of family values should not have run that in Tennessee… or anywhere, for that matter.” The full transcript of the Ford interview can be found here.

The Patriot-News’ Pennsyltucky Politics blog has the highlight of Wallace’s interview with Senator Santorum. Discussing President Bush’s and fellow Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter’s (R) support of the Senate immigration reform bill, Wallace asked the senator, “Does that make all of them soft on terror?” Santorum replied, “Well, I think in that particular respect, yes.” Woops. The Bob Casey campaign rushed out a video clip of the segment and – according to the blog – a press release saying that Santorum had called Bush soft on terror. The full transcript of the Santorum interview can be found here.

Liddy Dole meanwhile was in typically stubborn and obtuse form:

DOLE: But let me speak to Iraq. Each candidate must speak to Iraq from his own conscience. Obviously, it's a major issue. There's no question about that. But what we're trying to do is find a way to win. The Democrats appear to be convinced — or content, rather – to lose. And by lose, I mean...

WALLACE: You're talking about win and lose the election, or the war?

DOLE: The war. They appear to be content to lose.

She also betrayed a very clear ambition to distance the elections from being a referendum on Bush and the war, saying, “In my view, what we're doing is changing that scenario, because our candidates are talking about issues that are important in their states, such as corruption in New Jersey. It's like Tip O'Neill used to say, all politics is local.” Oh, oh Tip O’Neill said that? Oh, really? You sure it was Tip O’Neill? That’s funny because the Midterm Roundup has heard that quote roughly 750 times in the past month alone and it’s almost positive no one’s ever mentioned the name Tip O’Neill.

Later on Dole exhibited some more of that trademark obstinacy talking about stem-cell research:

DOLE: Thank you for asking my views, Chuck. First of all, let me say that Jim Talent supports medical research, without a doubt and certainly...

WALLACE: He doesn't support embryonic stem cell research.

SCHUMER: He voted against it. He supported the Brownback bill, which is against it.

DOLE: What he opposes is cloning a human embryo, the same for Michael Steele, opposes cloning a human embryo. Michael Steele is for stem cell research.

WALLACE: Embryonic, Senator Dole?

DOLE: We're talking about stem-cell research without cloning…

WALLACE: I'm asking about embryonic stem cell research.

DOLE: …without cloning a human embryo.

The Midterm Roundup is vaguely reminded of that scene in Ghostbusters when the guys are on the roof of the building trying unsuccessfully to zap Gozer, appearing in the form of the ghoulish woman. “Nimble little minx, ain’t she.” Sadly, the Roundup doesn’t have a clip of this scene for you, but please accept this awesome Ray Parker Jr. video in its stead.

Crooks and Liars has video of the Ford interview as well as Liddy Dole’s frantic closing remarks as she tries to squeeze in as many talking points as possible before Wallace is forced to cut her off and end the show.

Late Edition (CNN)

A.K.A. Midterm Roundup Short Shrift Edition. The Wolfman (happy Halloween everybody, btw) had on Representatives Charles B. Rangel (D-NY) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), U.S. ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad, and Senators Joe Biden (D-DE) and Richard Lugar (R-IN). Blitzer also aired his complete, unedited interview with Lynne Cheney. Plus, another midterm election debate panel. Here’s the transcript.

But what’s this? The Midterm Roundup actually watched this week? No. (To tell the truth, it doesn’t even get CNN.) But it did read the transcript, and it is simply determined to stem the tide of Wolf-Blitzer-short-shriftedness in this space. In that spirit, here’s a recap:

Rangel and Lehtinen mostly just talked about Iraq and the economy, only touching on the midterm elections in vague terms.

Blitzer then welcomed on Zalmay Khalilzad and asked him about the suspicious timing of Saddam Hussein’s verdict announcement (November 5, 2 days before Election Day).

KHALILZAD: Well, that decision was made by the Iraqi judges. The United States had nothing to do with the selection of the date. And we don't know whether the judges have come to a judgment or not. We do help the court in terms of the logistics and in terms of the technical assistance that the court needs and in terms of providing security.

But we don't determine the date for holding the meetings or the trial or the date for making the decision or announcing the decision with regard to Saddam Hussein.

After that Blitzer actually ran a series of video clips of midterm election talk from the other morning’s talk shows. The Roundup just doesn’t know about all that. It doesn’t seem fair for a Sunday morning show to come on after all the other Sunday shows. Personally, the Roundup just doesn’t trust Late Edition.

Then Wolf had on Biden and Lugar. Midterm elections, anyone?

BIDEN: And the American people are going to have a referendum on Iraq and his whole security plan. It's going to determine what happens in the next two years.

…

LUGAR: I'm not certain which will determine people's votes. But I would say, probably, the quality of the candidates will still be the major factor, as opposed to an overall referendum, either statewide or nationally.

Ahem, eh, excuse the Roundup, Dick. But it believes you forgot to mention Tip O’Neill. Remember what Tip O’Neill used to say? He used to say, “All politics is local.” Remember that?

Blitzer then showed his full interview with Lynne Cheney, the one in which she attacked Jim Webb’s novels while claiming her own contained nothing sexually explicit. The rest of the interview was similarly charged, as Cheney had some unkind words for Wolf and CNN, which she attacked for having an allegedly liberal bias and for airing “terrorist propaganda.” Blitzer described Cheney’s charges against him as “sniping at my patriotism.” Think Progress has more about all that.

Late Edition returned to real time with their midterm election political panel; featuring the American Enterprise Institute’s Norm Ornstein, Cook Political Report senior editor Amy Walter, and CNN senior analyst Jeff Greenfield. Did they touch on “the ad”? Yes, yes they did. Jeff Greenfield, however, answering Wolf’s question of whether he thought the ad “worked,” seemed to get it completely wrong:

GREENFIELD: We're going to find out. They pulled that ad. Ken Mehlman said, you know, I get this weird legal situation where I pay for those ads but I don't even see them. In the Corker campaign, the Republican candidate for senator in Tennessee, objected to that ad. And Harold Ford, for his part, is saying that this is clearly playing off an old core racist notion of black men looking for white women.

Now, maybe the Roundup missed it, but has Ford ever come out and said he believes the ad to be racially charged? Certainly in his interview with Chris Wallace Sunday morning (see above) and in his debate with Corker Saturday night (see Sunday morning’s Roundup) he refrained from that, instead just calling the ad smutty and inappropriate.

And as for the GOP pulling the ad, the Roundup hasn’t been able to find an entirely conclusive answer on this either, but the NY Times reported last week: “Moreover, Republican spokesmen said they did not believe the advertisement had been taken off the air in response to the controversy, but had simply, in the words of one, ‘run its course.’”

The rest of the panel discussion was pretty much ho-hum, and with that the Wolfman wrapped up Late Edition, just in time for…

IYI (If You’re Interested)

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE: The Big Blue Crush continued unabated on its swath of destruction Sunday, as the Giants dismembered the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, 17 to 3. The Midterm Roundup is indeed saddened to find that TPM’s modest forays into the sports commentary world have gone unappreciated by some readers. As for the Roundup, if you think this kind of adverse reaction is going to discourage it from continuing to comment on the New York Giants, well, it’s afraid you’ve got quite another thing coming. Fortunately, no readers of this space would dare speak ill of the Giants, knowing full well that if they ever did, ferocious, indomitable, and potentially criminally insane 6 foot 4 inch, 264 pound Giants running back Brandon Jacobs would somehow find out about it, hunt them down, and destroy them using only his right shoulder.