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")
Amen!
Murtha didn't vote for it ? He doesn't mind looking crazy but he is a tad saner than he looks?
The "Who's Who" list of anti-Americans in the House that are screwing up America. None Dare Call It Treason.
Jose Serrano of New York, Robert Wexler of Florida and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, Jim McDermott of Washington; Jerrold Nadler, Maurice Hinchey and Major Owens of New York; Michael Capuano of Massachusetts and William Lacy Clay of Missouri.
Possible with an informed electorate... unfortunately, we're not blessed with that. And while the House sported 'big ones' last night, the Senate's were still in a state of ascension. I heard 'Edith Bunker-Collins' say yesterday that she STILL hasn't made up her mind on Alito.
Unless the party... and the administration builds on the momentum we gained this week, the House vote will be meaningless. The Rino's have gotten the MSM's full-attention... and they like it.
IF the media covered what happened last night, at all or with any accuracy at least...YES they would likely lose seats. But it happening on the weekend and the convenient memory and priorities of our beloved media, it will be buried under "Rove's possible indictment" and "Bush defending the war overseas" and all the rest.
Ever cast your own bullets? When lead is molten, all the crap floats to the top and you can easily scrape if off and discard it into the trash as soon as it cools off a bit. I hope we see more of this put up or shut up tactic, it should be relentless over the next year just to keep the scum scraped off the top. Let them keep the burner on high now that there is momentum.
The next vote should be: Let Saddam out of jail, drop all charges against him and assist him in rebuilding his forces ...
You know, since we were all totally wrong about him and his motives.
Man, I can just see them squirming now...
I find the media hypocrisy amusing; if the Democrats had managed to get a few more votes -- even one Republican one -- I think that this vote would have been trumpeted from the skies.
I believe that the ridiculous Fitzgerald soap opera garnered much coverage for very little substance, and I believe that the MSM reaction to a just few more 'yes' votes in this case would have been on the level of the resignation of Nixon. Instead, since it didn't go their way, the MSM are downplaying the historic vote last evening. I checked news.google.com, and on the page generated for the news coverage this event, none of the headlines use the word "overwhelmingly", though the word does appear in a handful of the first lines of the stories. Instead, the headlines are predictably slanted to the left, downplaying the defeat of the Democrats:
Pullout debate takes nasty turn
White House plays chicken with a war hero
Call for Troops' Removal Reverberates at Home
House Erupts in War Debate
Democratic hawk blasts Bush over Iraq, urges pullout
Uproar in House as Parties Clash on Iraq Pullout (from the New York Times, which in this story doesn't even mention the overwhelming nature of the vote total until paragraph 6, and then goes trying to write excuses for it.)
I did find one headline for an opinion piece that was notably not defeatist: Cut and run in Iraq isn’t a real policy, but most of the rest ranged from left to way out into loony left territory.
Why we cannot even have semblance of objective journalism from the MSM is beyond me; their sales are dropping rapidly, hurting their ad revenues, and the editors are deluding themselves if they think it is just demographics. I think it is the content with its overwhelming left-wing bias that is driving many people away.
How do you figure that?
The Democrats asked for a CIA report on intelligence regarding Iraq. They admit they didn't read it. It was a report cleared for them to read. In other words, it wasn't classified.
So you'll have to let me know how it is you think I'm advocating for a leak in intelligence. LOL
I hear that when she gets her next facelift, there will be an additional piece of skin added to her eyelids to facilitate that action.
A good thing to...watching that secondary clear eye lid come up from the bottom of her eyes was creeping me out...
Yours and Congressman Billybob's :))
Sure glad you fellas are on our side!
Still dining with the Donner Party, I see.
Anyone surprised that the dems are LYING again.
It's called fighting back. I believe it started with the White house about two weeks ago, and I hope it continues.
Time to call it a day. We made our point.
HINCHEY voted "present"........the lousy democrat couldn't even take a stand.........a present vote translates to I want to vote no but don't dare to..........his district has Lockheed Martin....a defense contractor and the best he could muster was "present"..........LOSER. I wish this district would just vote him out of office.
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.