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 ...
What HAS changed is that these casualty counts have accumulated over time, and a war that was going on for 1.5 years in 2004 is now going on for 3.5 years -- with no real change in prospects readily apparent to people on BOTH sides of the issue.
Right now I'm trying very hard to stop picturing helicopters on an embassy roof:
Trying not to imagine an Iraq left on its own just in time for the next presidential campaign.
Thtat list is all well and fine, Johnnie, but how many people do you know (besides Freepers) that could not only enumerate all those accomplishments, but comprehend what they mean to the country in the long term?
Discounting us, you could probably count that number on one and half hands, if you were lucky.
Last night's disaster was a long time in the making, and it is marked by easily-identified events (in no particular order):
1. Jack Abramoff, Mark Foley, and Tom DeLay representing a "culture of corruption", and a lack of morals. Add in Trent Lott's arrogance ("the public has no right to know what goes into a spending bill"), Bill Frist's medocrity, Dennis Hastert's mental retardation, John McCain's self-inflating ego, and the general sense that most House/Senate repbublicans could do whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted, safe behind the "but the terrorists will get you if you don't keep me" shield.
2. Poor Federal response to Hurricane Katrina. It's all well and fine to blame Blanco and Nagin (and they deserve the majority of the blame), but a Federal government that cannot responde to a disaster is a Federal Government that needs to be fixed. DHS is not an effective agency; it is the result of a reshuffling of the Org Chart.
3. Apparent stand-off in Iraq. Victory in this war will not be measured by elections of third-world sh*tholes where such elections are held sans the required democratic institutions that should be established before said votes ever take place. Victory will be measured in the televised execution of Usama Bin Hidin' and every other identified terrorist scumbag, because THIS is the ONLY thing 8.5 out of 10 Americans can understand. After all, this is the country that believes "American Idol" is awesome entertainment.
4. Failure to pass entitlement reform, with a Majority, and eventually caving in(see the Infamous Gang of 14 compromise, i.e. John McCain's initial "f*ck you, Rich Boy!" shot across GWB's bow. He's till smarting from the primaries of '99). We will now go bankrupt as a nation that much quicker whilke the two richest generations of retirees in the history of the planet will get free drugs to cure a whole host of "serious" problems like "Chronic dry eye", "erectile dysfunction", male-pattern baldness, growing prostates and weak bladders, so that they can continue to relive their youth (for the Baby Boomers, youth is measured in sexual potency) in their old age, complete with government-supplied aphrodesiacs and herpes-suppression drugs.
5. Lack of restraint with regards to Federal budgets (Earmark Reform. See Porkbusters.com for more details).
6. Lack of border security - voting for a fence, but leaving it unfunded, caving to the various industries who require cheap labor, courting the hispanic vote by pandering.
These outweigh all the good economic news and the "we haven't been attacked since 9/11" or "Republicans will keep you safe" mantras. Sans another terrorist attack, most Americans with an IQ above room-temperature have already forgotten about September 11th (and unless you were really there, you could never be expected to fully comprehend the true nature of that horror). Those with below-room-temperature IQ's were going to vote democrat in any case.
They have been worn out with the repeated hammering of this one theme for five years (even though it's something they need to be reminded about constantly), and sans something else to talk about, they figured us for a one-trick pony. Even worse, a hypocritical one-trick pony; don't pay any attention to our libertine spending, forget that we're getting bribed by Indian casino interests, never mind that we allow open homosexuals to prey upon your children (Foley), we're still keeping you relatively safe.
Given this background, we're fortunate the outcome wasn't worse.
Time to clean house for 2008 and beyond. New blood and new ideas are required.
I agree on the issue of primaries, but I don't throw temper tantrums. I voted a straight republican ticket.
I am speaking objectively about why the Republicans lost the House, and I am speaking about those who didn't vote.
Take your two-year break. I prefer to stay, in hopes that any effort I put forth on this site or to my elected reps will result in a more educated, stronger electorate and the candidates that represent them.
Absolutely right. Even the Republicans have no ethics anymore. Why? Because they went to the same schools, watched the same junk entertainment, read the same trashy magazines. Our culture is probably terminally ill. It's tragic that so many good people, like our heroic military personnel, are going to suffer along with the sheeple, but history (including the Biblical history of Israel) demonstrates that when nations abandon principle and become morally corrupt, the entire populace has to pay. Seems very unfair, but that's the way it is.
We started down that road eons ago. We can only fight delaying tactics unless we get someone like Ronald Reagan that can turn back the tide. There is precious little will to stop the welfare process and with this president and the last republican Congress no will at all.
OTOH, losing seats in a midterm is the historical norm. That a president who barely won both his elections against repulsive opponents held on until his 6th year is pretty darn good. I don't think this election sent a message to anybody.
I nominate Wombat101 for chief Republican strategist.
Unfortunately, Democrats will vote for corrupt officials, look at Hevesi in NY. Republicans won't. Our guys have to be above reproach.
"Two HUGE ISSUES really worry me: Iraq and the illegals. Will the RATs screw them both up forever?"
If Dems cause us to lose Iraq (surely, they will pay no political price for this as the MSM will blame Bush for failure), rest assured that we will have war forced upon us elsewhere. I don't know when or where, but it will happen.
If Dems force a humiliating retreat from Iraq ala Viet Nam (gosh, twice in my life time) and Somalia, the lessons learned by both the resurgent jihadists and our "allies" (read moderate Arab regimes) will be that America cannot be trusted and is a paper tiger, unwilling to exert the necessary force for victory. Any Iraqi faction thus far committed to the democratic experiment will read the tea leaves and opt out for the security of their tribal insurgencies. Then, real civil war and partition. This is a generational set back.
If the message of this election is that Republican corruption and cronyism is bad, then OK. If, however, as I suspect the election will be spun as a repudiation of the GWOT, then God Help US! The majority of Americans are as decadent as the craven Euros we constatnly deride; unwilling to defend their common culture.
The greatest failure of Rumsfield was after the 2004 election we could have boosted US troop levels, increased the size of the Army, and got rid of the Madhi Army and really cleaned out Western Iraq.
Instead he continued to believe this less is more idea of warfare which allowed Zarqawi to finally spark a major sectarian conflict in Iraq making stabilizing the country much harder and making the war much less popular in the US.
Rumsfield should be removed as such general Abaizad who also believes in the Rumsfield docterine.
"What HAS changed is that these casualty counts have accumulated over time, and a war that was going on for 1.5 years in 2004 is now going on for 3.5 years -- with no real change in prospects readily apparent to people on BOTH sides of the issue."
This is exactly the opinion that the media has been grooming in the minds of the gullible electorate.(including you) The only thing missing is someone tossing their medals over the whitehouse fence.
It worked, they won the election for the democrats.
Did you ever stop and notice how many things on your list never made into law. I could care less that someone stands up for blah, blah, introduces bill, blah, blah, if they dont pass it and make it law.
Why the postmortem?? If you take a look at the results from previous 6th year midterms, the 6 year itch, this was hardly the resounding victory that the Dems seem to think it is. Even if there wasn't a war in iraq, and even if this congress hadnt been the laziest, greediest most venal congress we have ever seen, the 6th year midterm should still see the party in opposition take seats.
This is as "bad" as it gets. No party in a democracy can rule all the time. But here we are, the liberal media painting Bush as the worst president ever, nothing but bad news when it comes to republicans, mix in the historic "6 year itch" factor and yet , still the dems cant even take back the senate?? This is good bad news. This election was always going to be the low point, and yet, thanks to the Dems being a useless bunch of know-nothing say-nothing blowhards with no message and no direction for this country, the low point is not very low at all, and the climb back up is not going to be very difficult.
LOL
Why the postmortem?? If you take a look at the results from previous 6th year midterms, the 6 year itch, this was hardly the resounding victory that the Dems seem to think it is. Even if there wasn't a war in iraq, and even if this congress hadnt been the laziest, greediest most venal congress we have ever seen, the 6th year midterm should still see the party in opposition take seats.
This is as "bad" as it gets. No party in a democracy can rule all the time. But here we are, the liberal media painting Bush as the worst president ever, nothing but bad news when it comes to republicans, mix in the historic "6 year itch" factor and yet , still the dems cant even take back the senate??
More troops would have meant more targets and more pissed off Iraqis and fewer would want to "stand up." I am no fan of Rumsfeld but he was right to oppose more troops. More troops would be like giving more money to a welfare recipient or pouring more federal money into a poor neighborhood in Chicago.
Election summary = "tired of bad, lets vote for worse."
Yep, while our fellow Republicans may think they taught the GOP a lesson, the msm will spin their win as love of dims and their agenda and dim agenda is what we will get.
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.