Posted on 11/08/2006 6:35:06 AM PST by flixxx
THIS ONE IS PRETTY EASY TO EXPLAIN. Republicans lost the House and probably the Senate because of Iraq, corruption, and a record of taking up big issues and then doing nothing on them. Of these, the war was by far the biggest factor. Unpopular wars trump good economies and everything else. President Truman learned this in 1952, as did President Johnson in 1968. Now, it was President Bush's turn, and since his name wasn't on the ballot, his party took the hit.
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
You obviously think there is no islamic terrorist problem whatsoever. Must be nice to live in your world.
It looks to me like country wants middle of the road people in office.
With all due respect, that's a lot of baloney -- and we had better get off this "inaccurate MSM portrayal of Iraq" horse right now if we have any intention of being credible force in national politics for the foreseeable future. The MSM doesn't have to slant the coverage of Iraq at all when you've got dozens of U.S. military personnel killed and hundreds wounded every month -- more than three freaking years after the President declared an end to "major combat operations."
Ironically, the one guy in the larger scheme of things who comes out of this whole thing looking very shrewd is Muqtada al-Sadr. He knows damn well -- and has known all along -- that the U.S. was going to cut and run from Iraq at some point (due to political pressure in the U.S.) and leave the place in disarray, and he cobbled together his Mehdi Army to prepare for exactly this (so as to prevent a repeat of the 1991 debacle when the first Bush administration left the Shi'ites dangling).
I agree on the use of overwhelming force. Bush is like his father in that he believes in the utter fallacy of limited war.
However you are wrong about the Iraqi people.
The "insurgency" is only that if the people fighting are indigenous to the country where the fighting is taking place. The OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of those fighting our guys come from other countries... and that makes them mercinaries.
Iraq was a democracy for a long time. They are VERY welcoming of their newly-regained freedom.
They're dancing in the streets as they cancel truces.
"With all due respect, that's a lot of baloney -- and we had better get off this "inaccurate MSM portrayal of Iraq" horse right now if we have any intention of being credible force in national politics for the foreseeable future. The MSM doesn't have to slant the coverage of Iraq at all when you've got dozens of U.S. military personnel killed and hundreds wounded every month -- more than three freaking years after the President declared an end to "major combat operations."
To think that the media portrayal of the war in Iraq was not a major factor in the recent elections, is a perfectly ridiculous thing to think.
Two HUGE ISSUES really worry me: Iraq and the illegals. Will the RATs screw them both up forever?
"Remember, the terrorists hate Bush just as much as the Dems do."
Nah, the Dims hate him worse, the Terrorists do at least respect him, or at least respect him enough to know that he will do as he says he will do.
This has been a good opportunity for us to cleanse the GOP of moderates. Many lost yesterday. If we elect new GOP leadership that practices fiscal conservatism, we should have a good base to start from.
All of this may be true, but you can't side with the Dems on illegal immigration, and try to outspend FDR on unwanted social programs and still have an energized base on election day.
One "Oh crap" wipes out a lot of atta boys.
Too much compassionate, not enough conservatism.
I look for TV ratings to sink to the cellar. I know I just can't abide watching Nancy's eyes pop, and Schumer's sneer.
Fox has been getting less appealing for awhile now, and I watch nothing else.
Yep, just whistling past the graveyard. Interesting that the DUmmies use the circular logic that a lack of terrorist attacks shows it is an overblown danger, while ignoring the fact that Bush's anti-terrorist actions might be the reason for the absence of attacks. If Kerry were president right now, they wouldn't be using that logic.
The Republicans got fired for non-performance. If you hired a contractor to remodel your kitchen, and after 12 years all he did was replace the sink, you would fire him.
The government is bigger than ever, the deficit is huge, the national debt is beyond imagination, PBS and NPR are still suckling at the taxpayer's teat, the country is overrun with illegal aliens, the border is still wide open, the Dept. of Education is still run by teacher's unions, and on and on and on....
so what does President Bush need to do today... what should he say to the powerful left and majority of americans.
To the casual observer Iraq is portrayed as a portion better than anarchy and that premise will prevail until Iraq proves otherwise. The certainty of Iraq not serving US interests in a future [unforseen today] conflict confirms the perception of no gain in the security of the United States beyond what existed yesterday. These are truths that prevail in the populace of this country and are not congruent with the agenda of the Republican party.
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.