HOME_____BLOG _____BOOKS_____RADIO_____CLASSES_____VIDEO_____PUBLIC SPEAKER

Constitution Monitor:...............Trump...............Biden............... 2021 Congress

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

The aftermath of Election Day

I enjoyed tonight's installment of My Point Radio with Dave and Jenn, and I also participated in the discussion for about fifteen minutes. It is at times like that when you learn a little about yourself. Perhaps I am being a little hard on myself, but I think that I write much better than I speak.

Okay, enough of that. Thank you Jenn and Dave for having me, and I look forward to the next opportunity to be on the show. If my illness carries over, maybe I'll get the opportunity to speak with one of my favorite bloggers, Gunny John from Okinawa, who is a guest on your show on November 10th. I love his blog, and he is a regular visitor to the Pistachio.

Anyhow, I was thinking about Jenn's question, what did I think about the overall picture of the election. I said a few things about politics being cyclictic, and I stand by that, but now with my blog I would like to go into details of what I really think. Jonathan from CrushLiberalism has a good point when he wrote that some of the damage was mainstream media inflicted - but I only partially agree that an overwhelming amount was self-inflicted.

But let's go with that idea of self-inflicted damage. How did the Republicans shoot themselves in the foot that resulted in the GOP losing the House, and quite probably the Senate?

I believe the answer is that the Right's fault in this catastrophe lies in their inaction. That's right, the Republicans (and I am guilty of this as well) so believed that the American People would not fall for the lies of liberalism, that they arrogantly failed to go on the offensive. The mainstream media capitalized on the Right's inaction by creating an anti-Republican mood. The fine people of this nation did not vote the Democrats into power. They voted the Republicans out of power. The average voter dislikes the liberal left as much as the next person, but the media had everyone in such a frenzy about the war and many of the moral issues on the ballot, that people voted for the left simply because they truly thought (after being hammered by the MSM) that it was time for a change because the GOP can no longer be trusted. It must be true. CNN and MSNBC said so!

This situation is just like when Clinton originally got elected. He was the media's golden boy. The MSM loved him so much, and he had such a great smile (or so they say), and the people believed it - hook, line, and sinker. It didn't matter that the Reagan era was one of the most prosperous times in American history (after a liberal by the name of Jimmy Carter threw us into a massive recession, and allowed Iranian terrorists to hold over 50 Americans hostage in Tehran - how quickly the voters forget), and that he was credited with ending the Cold War. The news people loved this dude from Arkansas, and his feminist wife, so he must be A-okay.

We know that the left fights dirty. From the very beginning, even before 9/11, Nancy Pelosi admits that the Democratic Party's strategy was to reject everything Bush put on the table, and to commit an all out attack against him. That's how the left works. Their interests have nothing to do with the best interests of the nation. It's all about power. It's all about the Democratic Party. The Republican Party, and all of us Republicans (okay, maybe not all) underestimated what the DNC was capable of. Now, as a result of this, Bush's tax and entitlement reform proposals, and the extension of his tax cuts will be dead on arrival. His every move will be scrutinized and challenged. His ability to establish a functional relationship with the Democratic Congress is doomed. Suddenly, the veto is a very important weapon.

According to the press, the issue of the war in Iraq played prominently in several of the Democrat's gains in the House. In fact, it was probably a factor in every race across the country, dragging down the Republican hopes of maintaining control, making many of the races close when they should never have been competitive in the first place. Why? Okay, we all agree that war is hell, but it is ludicrous to imagine anybody believing that if we just leave terrorism alone it will simply go away. But that is really what they think!

This is why Rumsfeld stepped down. Maybe it was a good thing, but it is idiotic to say that he mismanaged the war effort. If he was guilty of anything, it is the fact that he sometimes did not fully consider the advice of the generals over there, and his inability to at least consider alternative courses of action. Most of all, his fault, and Bush's too, lies in the fact that they have not made the people understand that this is a war, and we should be over there fighting to win it, not just keep the peace.

People are tired of the effort over there, and the media has pounded into them everything wrong with it. It's gotten to the point that nobody has noticed (or been shown by any of the media giants) anything going right over there. They, the MSM, are quick to politicize the car bomb in Baghdad, but fail to relay any information about the progress being made in all of the provinces. The voters don't think about these things, and when it comes to politics, they don't like the hee-hawing around.

It's a war on terror, dammit! All of it. Iraq, Afghanistan, the difficulties with Iran, and Israel's dealings with Hezbollah and Hamas. It is a war on terror, and we must be all in and fight it. If we are not one hundred percent in for the win, and if we are all more worried about exit strategies rather than how we can reach our goals, then we have no business being there. If we cut and run, we deserve to be hit by terrorists again. Perhaps then the left will realize how important it is to protect America and her interests.

Another strategy that the left used, which actually impressed me a little, was recruiting candidates who were willing to run as conservative Democrats. You know these guys. Pro-life, pro-gun types like Harold Ford, Joe Donnelly, Brad Ellsworth, Heath Shuler, etc. etc. etc. I guarantee you these guys won't be so conservative once they take office (minus Ford, I think he actually lost).

But here is the biggest disappointment of all (and this subject was touched on while I was on the radio show with Jenn and Dave), Prop. 85 in California and Measure 43 in Oregon. These issues would have required the notification of parents when their minor girls seek abortions. And I guarantee you the people voting it down probably don't have kids because nobody in their right mind with a daughter would want her to be allowed to get an abortion without the parents being notified. My 16 year old daughter can't even get an aspirin at school without my permission, for God's sake, but she can get an abortion? How insane is that?

On My Point Radio, Dave made a comment that by reading my blog he believed that my daughter and I have a good avenue of communication, so it probably won't be a problem. I appreciate his comment, and he's right, I have a good enough handle on my daughter in the sense of our relationship that she is honest with me and I with her. But can you really trust a teenager? Do you remember when you were young?

And for those people that voted down Prop. 85 and Measure 43, think about this: When you do eventually have children, would you like your child to be able to terminate the life of an unborn child without your knowledge? Even if you support abortion, you would think that these people would want to know so that they could at least be there for that child, or help them choose a safer clinic (not that I think any abortion clinic is safe).

Finally, now that Nancy Pelosi is going to be the Speaker of the House, do we really know her? Do we really want her San Francisco values taking control? She is one of the most liberal members of the House. She voted against cutting taxes by $70 million, against renewing the Patriot Act, against reducing the death tax, against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and against making it a crime to desecrate the U.S. flag. She supports gay marriage, and backed legislation allowing overseas military facilities to provide abortions for women in the military and military dependents. The would-be speaker also backed a measure calling for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, supported a bill requiring a 72-hour background check for persons buying weapons at gun shows — and opposed a bill strengthening the enforcement of immigration laws. Though she claims to be pro-union, her $25 million Northern California vineyard is a non-union shop. She states that her stance on the environment is an ethic, but one of her largest investments is a private partnership called Lions Gate Limited, which operates the CordeValle Golf Club and Resort in San Martin, California. To get a permit to build the facility, the partners promised to build a "public course" providing considerable access to non-members, and to abide by several environmental requirements to ensure that there would be minimal ecological damage. But after the facility opened, the county's Planning Commission found that the golf course was in fact private — and the club had "ignored" many of its permit requirements concerning the environment! The fact is, the liberal left preaches in moral platitudes. You can have freedom of speech as long as it agrees with them (just ask Columbia University).

They have high standards for everyone, but when it comes to applying those same standards to themselves, liberals are quite the hypocrites.

So what is my overall feelings regarding November 7th, 2006? Democrats support surrender in Iraq, higher taxes, hate Bush, want to take your guns away from you (I'll have mine loaded and pointed when that day comes - and that day has come in New Orleans, but we'll save that one for another article), support same sex marriage and rights, support abortion, does not believe you should be allowed to know what your children are doing unless they need an aspirin at school, believes that if they raise taxes on cigarettes high enough it'll force people to quit smoking (like the government should be able to determine what people are allowed to do in that instance - and this is coming from an ex-smoker), and believes that morality is only a matter of opinion. With them in control of the Congress, we are in deep doo doo. But, it could be worse. Could you imagine a world with Hillary Clinton as President, and Nancy Pelosi as her running mate?

Excuse me, I have to run to the bathroom and. . .

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Henny Penny. The sky is falling!

Oooh, San Fransico. You know, San Fransicians are every bit as American as you are.

Anonymous said...

The upside is that by the time the 2008 elections come the dems will have used up any good will they might think they have.

They don't like the idea that it was only moderates that won and their leaders are having to pretend to be more moderate than they are....

It's going to be a rough couple of years. I'm trying to look at it from the stand point that it can be cleansing in the long run.

God help our troops!

Anonymous said...

The dems will get the troops the armor and equipment they need, and will investigate why they didn't get it in the first place. So we don't need gods to help our troops, the calvery has arrived.

Anonymous said...

say WHAT?
'The dems will get the troops the armor and equipment they need, and will investigate why they didn't get it in the first place. So we don't need gods to help our troops, the calvery has arrived.'

WOW! mudkitty, this goes totally against what you said previously.
Do yo know that the Dems want to 'cut and run'.

And to say 'the calvery has arrived' is a farce!
Do you even know what the Dems are like?

I don't know man, maybe I am missing something here, but I cannot see the Dems wanting victory in Iraq.
How many times have they spoken against the occupation? They are against everything that keeps the Military great!

FTGF!

Thanks Gibss for being open an honest. And thanks, I will add ya later.
Having some morons posting lately.
Apparently they are offended at those Liberal statements.

FTGF!

Anonymous said...

'But that is really what they think!'
You got that right Gibbs.
I will listen to the archive tonight from the show. You are a good writer and I rspect your views.
lol at your final statement!
take care
FTGF!

~Mary said...

DG..you made some pretty good points. I am all on your side when it comes to Pelosi. I think she is dangerous given the amount of power she's been given. And I am a female but I would hate having Hillary occupy the seat of President more so than her less-than-honorable husband. And if Pelosi is VP? {shudderin}

Anonymous said...

This whole "cut and run" thing is a republican fantacy. Sorry, you never heard it from me, and you never heard it from a democrat.

Do I know what democrats are like? Yes, I AM one. If you want to know what democrats are like, ask me. Like I'm going to take your word for what democrats are like when I am one. Yeah, right. That makes sense, not.

Nearly half the military is democratic, so when you insult the democrats you insult nearly half the military. (Go look it up.)

If Pelosi scares you guys, you're even bigger wusses than I thought.

Anonymous said...

Mudkitty, Ya need to get some o' dat mud outta your ears... Murtha, Reid, Levin, Durbin, Kennedy, Kerry, have ALL called for "phased redeployment" or "scheduled withdrawls" which is nothing other than cut and run as far as the terrorists are concerned. They just have to wait until we leave. DUH!

Over 60% of the active duty forces support the President and the war effort.

The pollsters don't ask WHAT about the war in Iraq the respondents don't like: that's because more than half of them would say they think it needs to be prosedcuted MORE aggressively.

Oh well, interesting comments Doug!

All the best,
Dumb Ox

Anonymous said...

I will grant you the handle (cut and run), but it IS their strategy.

Speaking of your defense of being a Democrat:
mudkitty said, -'It's going to be up to the dems in '08 to figure out a dignified exit stratigy.'

Yes, It is clear to me that you are a Democrat.
And it sounds like a 'cut an run' policy to me.
Care to clearify your stance?
FTGF!

Anonymous said...

Just for the record; your accusation of me insulting the Military is beyond me. How did you come to that conclusion (?)
Have you ever looked at my blog? It is PRO Military!
FTGF!

Anonymous said...

TFG - it's called irony.

So to you, staying is winning. Oh yeah, we can just smell the victory...

Anonymous said...

You have quite the responce.
You really didn't explain anything. (?)
Sarcasm is definitely an attribute of a Democrat.
Which part is irony? Could you please expound on that statement.
It seems to me that you are negating your own comments.
FTGF!

Anonymous said...

You need it spelled out? Half the military is democratic! Jeez. Come on, drink some coffee.

Anonymous said...

You are not making any sense at all.
I SAID, LOOK AT MY BLOG, IT IS PRO MILITARY!
Democrats, Republicans, Independants, Moderates, right, left, in the middle...
The Military has a wide depersion of any one these political associations.
If a Military person is a Democrat, I am for him/her!
Your statistical analysis of a poltical view within the Military has nothing to do with your accusation against me.

Can't you see that?

Ok lets see. I will entertain your logic.

"Nearly half the military is democratic, so when you insult the democrats you insult nearly half the military. (Go look it up.)"

You say that nearly half of the Military are Democrats. So, to insult a Democrat is to insult the Military.

That is your logic, plain to see, no need to spell it out.

It is a fallacy. That statement is illogical. It's cannot make sense.
It's a silly thing to say!

And then to back that statement up with
"Half the military is democratic!"

Is not an explaination at all!

FTGF!

Anonymous said...

I know, you claim you blog is pro military, except for the half of the military that you disagree with. Very simple to understand. What's your problem?

Anonymous said...

I know, you claim you blog is pro military, except for the half of the military that you disagree with. Very simple to understand. What's your problem?

Anonymous said...

Mudkitty...get with it.
'CLAIM' are you blind?

FTGF!