Posted on 11/19/2006 2:39:53 AM PST by Tom D.
As the saying goes, fools rush in where angels fear to tread. I think there are people with more perspective and sanguinity who do not see losing 15 seats in a legislature of 535 as a big deal. Then there are the chattering classes whose jaws have come unwired and seem to be flappping their gums to any and every tune this week. New direction will come from the national conversation engendered by the presidential election, not from post election cruises of pundits.
IMHO, 5 years of relentless attacks, lies and contrived BS by the LSM (left-stream media) finally wore down W's self-confidence and resolve.
"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly; so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat." THEODORE ROOSEVELT (Paris Sorbonne,1910)
""Freedom is the desire of every human heart." Really? ... The story of the Western world since 1945 is that, invited to choose between freedom and government "security," large numbers of people vote to dump freedom -- the freedom to make your own decisions about health care, education, property rights, seat belts and a ton of other stuff."
Heh. If you say that on FR, be prepared to be called 'loosertarian' and 'libertine.' Mark has finally run up against the foamers.
Fundivangelists? LOL
Socon is so much more ... concise. You're right, though. The republican tent is looking as fractious as the democrat morass ever was.
"The only people we thoroughly defeated were the Germans"
Heh. Unfortunately, relying solely on Japanese histories of WWII provides less that a complete picture of the war's outcome.
Thanks for the post, Tom. Thanks for the ping Pokey!
The president doesn't frame it like that, alas. Instead, he says stuff like: "Freedom is the desire of every human heart." Really? It's unclear whether that's the case in Gaza and the Sunni Triangle.
Part of the problem is too many people don't look at this (the Bush doctrine) in a long term way. come back in 20-30 years and see what this part of the world is like, because that's the time frame the President is looking at. Will this work? I seem to have misplaced my crystal ball so I can't say. This I do suspect it will be 2 steps forward 1 step back. What's the alternative? Nuking the area?
Can we start looking at the forest instead of the trees?
Steyn may be conservatives' clearest visionary writer.
Cute. But the implied insult will do nothing to motivate them to vote for Republican social liberals.
Social conservatives are key to any presidential election. No recent Republican candidate ever won by appealing to social liberals; no recent Democratic candidate ever won except by appealing to social conservatives.
What has happened to the Republican Pary? If they want to be Dems they may as well change parties, because voters, when given a choice between Dems and Dems Lite, seem to opt for The Real Thing.
However, I support the Bush Doctrine on two grounds -- first, for "utopian" reasons: If the Middle East becomes a region of free states, it will have been the right thing to do and the option most consistent with American values (unlike the stability fetishists' preference for sticking with Mubarak, the House of Saud and the other thugs and autocrats). But, second, it also makes sense from a cynical realpolitik perspective: Promoting liberty and democracy, even if they ultimately fail, is still a good way of messing with the thugs' heads. It's one of the few real points of pressure America and its allies can bring to bear against rogue nations, and in the case of Iran, the one with the clearest shot at being effective. In other words, even if it ultimately flops, seriously promoting liberty and democracy could cause all kinds of headaches for the mullahs, Assad, Mubarak and the rest of the gang. However it turns out, it's the "realist" option.
EXACTLY!!!!
I've noticed it too. Who wouldn't feel that way after recent elctoral events?
They fear nothing of the kind, and I'm not inclined to think these people are crazy. It's an imposture--they pretend this fear in order to express deed-seated disdain and resentment to their ultimate political demise. It's simple. They don't like the conservative religious. It's a childish thing, to reject an alliance out of simple dislike, but people don't invent terms like "Fundiangelist" for any other reason.
True in spades. Returning to freedom of religion as framed in the Bill of Rights hardly means theocracy. The problem is that most of the fundapaths confuse theocracy with a nationwide perception of right and wrong, good and evil.
<< .... are Steyn's columns more and more, well, burdened, grave, sad lately? >>
Yes.
Thanks for the ping to an unusually insightful analysis (well, not unusual for Steyn)
Apparently, Dr. Friedman opposed the Iraq war. I don't agree with Friedman on this issue, but Steyn - invoking Friedman's name on the Iraq war - should at least have been honest enough to acknowledge this fact.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.