Posted on 11/09/2006 6:33:51 PM PST by Jo Nuvark
Chuck Muth's DC CONFIDENTIAL
November 8, 2006
ELECTION POST-MORTEM
While most Republicans woke up this morning lamenting Armageddon Tuesday, some of us didn't lose any sleep over the election results. Happy at the prospect of two years with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi running Congress? Hardly. But there are a lot of silver linings behind these otherwise dark clouds.
(Excerpt) Read more at citizenoutreach.com ...
Your post made me think of something.
Our guys just fall apart when they are accused of something. They feel obliged to defend these attacks because hopefully they are men and women of character. However, that's where we lose it every time.
Somebody needs to get control of this and teach how to avoid getting side tracked by snipe attacks. We could take a lesson from Arnold.
We need to include this "fix" in our '08 strategy.
I like your terms.
That's not particularly comforting. you can say of 1994 that Republicans didn't win, democrats lost, and you would be right. It took them 12 years to win back the House, and that's when they WE didn't really 'win.'
"Animal Farm" Tuesday
I'm likin's it Fudd Fan. Good job. Will add it to list.
Jo
There's nothing comforting about this election.
Stupid is as stupid does.
"Stuck on Stupid" Tuesday.
Update
The "Red Tuesday" Phenomenon
"Eating Our Young" Disorder
"Shoot Ourselves In The Foot" Syndrome
"Stuck on Stupid" Tuesday
"Animal Farm" Tuesday
Speaking of strategy, our side needs to read von Clawswitz. The Democrats understand that war is politics by other means. We think if we make nicey-nice, the other side will stop trying to transform our country into a dictatorship of the proleteriat.
The worst thing is when we nominate "electable" RINO's because we need the numbers. They ultimately undermine our credibility, force bizarre policies, and get involved in some form of scandal. All of this simply gives the leftists real ammunition to call us fiscally irresponsible, corrupt and more interested in protecting our own than protecting congressional pages.
You are a great thinker. Way over my head. But, what
do you think of "The Art of War" for a strategic handbook?
I just sent your suggestion about Clawswitz to Bobby
Eberle over at the GOP website. We need a Clauwswitz /
Sun Tzu bootcamp for our candidates. It could only help.
While we're talking about it, I left my women's Republican
organization because it was petty. Not once, did they
attempt to teach how to engage the enemy with a persuasive
defense of conservatism. What I did learn was that the
organization was impotent.
Jo
Give Bobby my best. We had a good discussion over drinks a few CPACs ago.
We (our family) have given up on playing an active role within the party. As you point out, its petty, and attracts lots of self serving folks. We have more influence through pure conservative channels, where we can support Republican candidates selectively, so that our money and time go to the Santorums and not the Chaffees of the party. I particularly like the Heritage Foundation, and The Club for Growth, as well as ISI for the work they do in restoring higher education.
On your other point, Sun Tzu is always worth reading, but a good conservative should be conversant with the classics in general.
Give Bobby my best. We had a good discussion over drinks a few CPACs ago.
We (our family) have given up on playing an active role within the party. As you point out, its petty, and attracts lots of self serving folks. We have more influence through pure conservative channels, where we can support Republican candidates selectively, so that our money and time go to the Santorums and not the Chaffees of the party. I particularly like the Heritage Foundation, and The Club for Growth, as well as ISI for the work they do in restoring higher education.
On your other point, Sun Tzu is always worth reading, but a good conservative should be conversant with the classics in general.
[...a good conservative should be conversant with
the classics in general...]
Spoken like a true intellectual.
Our party needs to unencumber itself and get back to
fundamental rules of engagement. How hard is that?
PROBLEM: Our guy is hypothetically accused of ...
(gasp) ... having red hair. Then our guy acts like
having red hair is a moral indiscretion.
EXAMPLE: So what if Allen called someone a "macaca".
He should have said, "yeah, what of it? Are you such
a weanie, you can't take a little name calling?"
Foley's homosexuality is only an issue because his
political values are conservative. He knew eventually
this attack would come and should have prepared a
response other than running off to rehab.
SOLUTION: Our team needs "snappy come-back" coaching.
Two very different situations. Allen chose a word poorly, but failed to recover effectively. He could have used some tactical skills for that situation.
Foley had a weakness that resulted in actions fundamentally inconsistent with conservatism. Conservatives do not flirt with kids young enough to be their children, let alone with members of the same sex. If Foley's homosexuality was well known he should have been ministered to, but also counseled to step aside. When someone has a moral conflict with the principle of their party, it is no different than any other conflict of interest situation.
If you are a democrat, it's perfectly consistent to have "flexible" morals. But if you claim to be a conservative, you must live as one.
Two very different situations. Allen chose a word poorly, but failed to recover effectively. He could have used some tactical skills for that situation.
Foley had a weakness that resulted in actions fundamentally inconsistent with conservatism. Conservatives do not flirt with kids young enough to be their children, let alone with members of the same sex. If Foley's homosexuality was well known he should have been ministered to, but also counseled to step aside. When someone has a moral conflict with the principle of their party, it is no different than any other conflict of interest situation.
If you are a democrat, it's perfectly consistent to have "flexible" morals. But if you claim to be a conservative, you must live as one.
[...If you are a democrat, it's perfectly consistent to have "flexible" morals...]
Awesome statement.
What has come back to bite is the idea that fiscal conservatism can cohabit with social liberalism.
SIDEBAR: Foley could have exposed the hypocritical four fingers pointing back to his fellow gay accusers.
Precisely!
Hello Jo! Good to see you!
Hun! Great to hear from you. I've been off line for a while because of the move. How are you feeling?
Your post is accurate and cathartic.
If only you could run the world.
Bottom line... I have a very bad feeling
about this.
Mom
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.