You're right, but I think its appropriate to ask why we lost so we can readjust in the future
You are correct about that.
I think people are making it more difficult than need be. The Republicans have had total control for 6 years and still didn't get it about illegal immigration. That IS a big issue to a LOT of people. The midwest is hurting economywise, the war in Iraq was seen as taking too long and the farce of having a war on terror while having open borders.
I think people thought they would give the Republicans some time to see what they could achieve since they had total control. After 6 years I think people decided - ENOUGH! It isn't uncommon for a president to have to deal with the opposing party in control of Congress and I think people just figured it was time (after 6 years) to give the other party control of Congress.
I think those worried about impeachment over Iraq are looking at the wrong reason.
IN VIOLATON OF THEIR OATH OF OFFICE
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion." Article IV Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution.
Each of these elected men and women swore on a Bible to represent Americans and uphold the Constitution. Today, the majority of these elected officials are in violation of their oath of office. Beyond this violation, with severe consequences for their law abiding U.S. citizen constituents—is the poor example they set-absence of honor and legality
Then again, since the dems and Bush are on the same page reguarding guest workers/scamnesty, who knows, maybe they will overlook it.
You said: You're right, but I think its appropriate to ask why we lost so we can readjust in the future
No spin necessary. The GOP lost because it did not advance conservatism or Republicanism. It ran a trade deficit, a budget deficit, and did not dent the debt. It increased spending across the board on a per dollar and as a percentage of GDP to all time highs. It kept and grabbed more control in Washington and did not devolve power as Republicanism stands for. They deserved to lose because they acted like Democrats for the last 6 years.
Lack of leadership is right. Almost every Republican president since I can remember has always been more active on foreign affairs than domestic ones. It was Newt's domestic agenda that got them elected, but once in power they forgot why they were elected. What, welfare reform? That was 8 years ago. Nothing since of merit or accomplishment.
Now we're gonna get James "F the Jews" Baker to come up with a new foreign policy because the GOP thinks this election was a referendum on Iraq? Nonsense, this election was a referendum on a lame, aimless congress. And this latest move has the potential to turn what could have been Bush's saving grace in the history books - success in changing the political landscape in the ME - into a loss. Like father like son? Too bad. I liked Bush and thought he would go down as a fairly good president with the right ideas on foreign policy, but James Baker is sure to screw that legacy up. What a shame.