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 Â 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 Â 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. . .