Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Landscape-Altering Vote Last Night
self ^ | 11/19/05 | LS

Posted on 11/19/2005 6:19:28 AM PST by LS

Before Congressman Billybob jumps in with what I know will be an astute analysis, I'll get my two cents in on last night's vote. I consider it to be potentially a landscape-altering vote.

First, as a caveat for all you "The-Republicans-Always-Snatch-Defeat-From-The-Jaws-of-Victory" crowd, let me admit it's a long way to 2006 and the GOP still can shoot itself in the foot, ankle, and probably rectum several times before the election. So can Bush. However, tactically this was brillilant (thank you J.D. Hayworth, Denny Hastert, and all who spoke), and for now, the GOP not only seized the high ground, but they have the Dems fully on the run.

Pay no attention to what the MSM says about this vote ("Fox and Friends" mindless twitterers were already saying, "Well, of course we can't just pull out now," which, of course is exactly what Murtha recommended and what the Dems want to do). This was a huge vote, a potentially landscape-altering vote. The GOP forced the Dems to choose between the general election next year and the primaries, and the Dems chose the general election. The result will be threefold: 1) a dramatic decrease in funding of the Dems across the board, but especially the House members' campaigns (as if Dean wasn't hurting them enough in that area anyway); 2) a decrease in the committed volunteers from the Michael Moore/Moveon/Moonbat wing; and 3) probably the most serious, intense challenges in the primaries for many of these incumbents from the left. By the way, for all the Rush Limbaugh bashers on the board, this was precisely the strategy that Rush recommended before he left on break: MAKE the Dems become more extreme and cater to their base even more.

When you add to that the sound bite gifts that the Dems gave the Republicans who can use it in all campaigns ("Our soldiers have become the enemy," for example), this tactical maneuver not only recaptured all the lost momentum from the last two months, but put the Dems on the defensive on their worst issue, and the one currently costing Bush the most at the polls. Then you have the great sound bites from the GOP side, including Congresswoman Schmidt's fantastic "cowards surrender, Marines never do!" THAT ONE will be on all the ads, you can believe it. (And it doesn't matter that she "withdrew" her remarks: they are still playing it on the tube). She is in the district next to mine, and I'm glad those fine people in Hamilton County sent her to Congress and not DeWine the lesser.

As if all this weren't enough, several Republicans emerged as stars through their actions and speeches, including Schmidt, Hayworth of Arizona, and Sam Johnson of Texas. Others severely damaged their credibility by either praising Murtha (Curt Weldon, who badly damaged his Able Danger campaign with his stupid speech) or taking the opportunity to nip at Bush (Tom Tancredo, who hurt the immigration issue that badly needs fixing). If one wonders why such people aren't in positions of power in the GOP, that was a good example of the fact that they cannot keep their eye on the ball and, to mix metaphors, "bunt the runner over to third" by sticking to the topic.

Perhaps most important, anyone watching the incredible debate had to come away with a sense that in fact these Democrats are not "patriots" and that they indeed wish we could somehow lose in Iraq. It is interesting that to my knowledge not one Dem read a single letter from a soldier at the front (I think Murtha read one from a guy in a mental ward). ALL the GOP letters were from soldiers at the front.

These comments will get out, despite the MSM. The new media will get them out; campaign ads will get them out, and if I were the GOP, right now I would assemble an ad with sound bites of these Dems' treasonous comments and start running them immediately! THE CAMPAIGN STARTS TODAY.

My take on this is that if correctly played, last night's vote possibly could cost the Dems up to 30 seats in the House in 2006. This could very well be as significant as the vote in 1900 "for" continuing to fight the Filipino Insurrection and to keep McKinley in the White House. You heard it here first. We'll see if Frist and the Senate have the same cajones or political insight that the House members have.

LS

(co-author, "A Patriot's History of the United States")


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 109th; 2006election; abledanger; bush; calledtheirbluff; cutandrun; democrats; immigration; iraq; murtha; senate; tancredo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-195 next last
To: Cboldt
You know--Doggett is a big liberal voter, and he's from Travis Country (where Delay was indicted)--but he manages to always fly under the radar. He doesn't introduce any legislation, or stir any controversies, and collects from the rich Austin libs. He does have a 100% positive rating from the abortion mills. He's big for the trial lawyers...

He needs to get cornered.

141 posted on 11/19/2005 11:37:33 AM PST by Mamzelle (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: FreedomSurge

Sorry, but I don't have time to read through umpteen hours of material to try to find supporting evidence for your claim. Plus, as I mentioned in my previous post, your statement doesn't even say that the Iraqis are ready now, only that they are making good progress. I agree with that, and repeat that I haven't seen anybody claim they are ready now.


142 posted on 11/19/2005 12:04:25 PM PST by savedbygrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: grannyheart2000
Weldon rambled a little, praised Murtha a lot, and tried to make it appear like this was not an "attack" on Murtha. That was all irrelevant, and it was how the Dems were going to spin it anyway. Only a few congresscritters from each side got to speak, and to waste time like that when he could have been scoring points was unpardonable.

Tancredo took some subtle swipes at the White House---fine, but not the time or place.

143 posted on 11/19/2005 1:02:08 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LS

well done


144 posted on 11/19/2005 1:02:32 PM PST by King Prout (many accuse me of being overly literal... this would not be a problem if many were not under-precise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JLAGRAYFOX

Agreed. If Frist had any sense, he'd do that. But remember, Hastert was PRODDED into doing this by Hayworth. Where is the gutsy U.S. Senator who will prod Frist?


145 posted on 11/19/2005 1:03:23 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Brooklyn Kid

Pretty much agree, although, as I say, there's a new sheriff in the media town, and the word WILL get out as to why said what, why.


146 posted on 11/19/2005 1:05:16 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

And I said that, a couple of times.


147 posted on 11/19/2005 1:05:36 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RoseofTexas

Good strategy. Go straight to the RNC, which DOES seem to want to get in the game. We need to, as much as possible, bypass the spineless Senate.


148 posted on 11/19/2005 1:06:22 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: lemura
You are the second one on this thread to suggest that, and it may have merit. I don't know how a declaration of war against a nation-less enemy would work, but it should be explored.

BTW, when a Republican used the term "Islamofascists" last night, the Dems BOOED!!! That alone needs to be brought out---that somehow we cannot invoke the name of evil?

149 posted on 11/19/2005 1:08:24 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Reily
So I'll take credit for this one: How many French soldiers does it take to defend Paris?

Answer: no one knows. It's never been attempted.

150 posted on 11/19/2005 1:09:37 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas

This was the 2005 equivalent of the Contract With America in terms of its galvanizing ability.


151 posted on 11/19/2005 1:10:13 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: bert

Funny---and no one even brought this up last night---if the polls are right, and if support for the war is "dwindling," then the Dems should be thrilled to go on record against the war. This should tell every honest person (which, of course, eliminates Dionne) that the polls are manipulated and reflect nothing close to the truth.


152 posted on 11/19/2005 1:11:28 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: LS

Anyone seen a transcript of the Murtha comments on the floor last night when he was trashing our military?


153 posted on 11/19/2005 1:11:36 PM PST by RobFromGa (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran-- what are we waiting for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

That's exactly what I'm counting on. Some of those who "went soft" last night will be replaced by Moonbats in the Dem primaries; others will lose to Republicans in the general elections because the Moonbats won't support/fund them.


154 posted on 11/19/2005 1:12:26 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: LS
Then you have the great sound bites from the GOP side, including Congresswoman Schmidt's fantastic "cowards surrender, Marines never do!" THAT ONE will be on all the ads, you can believe it.

I disagree. It might make it on to a 527 ad or two, but no Republican will touch it. Republicans believe believe that the worst possible sin of all is discourtesy, and would never dream of using such strong moral-laden language. ("Might turn off the swing voters, you know, old boy!"

155 posted on 11/19/2005 1:14:18 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BonnieJ
Bad analysis. We don't NEED for this to get out for it to yield 30 seats. What is important is that the Dems went on record "for" the war, and the Moonbats will go bananas. They will run radicals in the primaries; and some will win; and when the incumbents run in the generals, it isn't REPUBLICANS who will defeat them but their base by staying home/not funding them.

This is reversing 180 degrees what had happened with the Miers/Katrina stuff where the GOP base was getting turned off and Bush's poll numbers (and those of the GOP in Congress) sagged. That wasn't DEMS sinking Bush, it was REPUBLICANS. Now, it will be DEMOCRATS (the radicals) sinking the moderates.

156 posted on 11/19/2005 1:16:14 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: rodguy911
I think Fox, like any company, is suffering from several things. First, its own success has led some conservative news people, commentators, etc. to be lured away into other jobs or to competitors. That has watered down the conservative content a little. We don't see all the writers, producers, etc. who may have been diluted by this.

Second, the success of Fox has given them enough credibility that SOME of those who were "quiet liberals" on the talk shows now have become more outspoken.

Third, I think as always some people "go native" after they get in the big cities and in the "business" for a while and start to become more "tolerant" and liberal. I can't prove it, but it seems the "Fox and Friends" chat people, esp. the women, have become more liberal over the last four or five years.

Fourth, as Fox takes away market from the liberal stations, there is a business incentive to try to "hang on" to that market (always optimistically assuming you can "keep" your original conservative market). It's stupid, but I guarantee there are some of those types of discussions going on.

157 posted on 11/19/2005 1:19:50 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: snowsislander

Yes but it is irrelevant. My point is that we weren't TRYING to influence the media last night, but to drive a wedge where it hurts: between the "moderate" Dems who can win a general election by sounding "reasonable" and the Moonbat Dems who fund them and give them their volunteers. And we did that. Forget the MSM---this is about decapitating the "respectable" Dems from their idiotic base.


158 posted on 11/19/2005 1:21:25 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere

Thank you, my dear.


159 posted on 11/19/2005 1:21:47 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Zman

I"ve got the whiskey if you've got the keys for these Dem teens :)


160 posted on 11/19/2005 1:22:23 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-195 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson