Life Goes On...
Congratulations to the Democrats. I may be eating crow this morning for breakfast; but after I wash it down with a nice glass of bourbon, I'm back in the fight!
Upward and onward...
No, I did not follow the Election every step of the way, thank goodness. I know a lot of my fellow conservative voters are disappointed, as am I.
Lieberman will be an interesting Congressman to watch for. On every major issue, beyond the war on terror, Joe Lieberman's voting record is liberal. If this Election was all about President Bush and a referendum on the Iraq War, how is it that Joementum carried Lieberman through to victory? Especially since the reason given by the moveon.org Democrats is that the former vice presidential candidate for their party was tarred, feathered, and shown the door on account of his staunch support of President Bush when it came to the War on Terror. I'd be curious to know what percentage of his supporters are Democrats and what percentage Republicans.
Yesterday in the Washington Post, Michael Kinsley (who is not a conservative writer) wrote a column discussing the House Democrats 31 page manifesto, "A New Direction for America".
But in the entire document there is not one explicit revenue-raiser to balance the many specific and enormous new spending programs and tax credits.With Democrats controlling the House, what does this mean for America? Will President Bush and Congress be able to work together in the best interest of our country? Or will nothing get accomplished? President Bush is serious when it comes to the war on terror. Will Democrats get serious? What does it take to get America to wake up and see how crucial it is, that we succeed in Iraq? Many in our military seem to "get it". Why doesn't the liberal establishment in the media? Does the press understand war and the role they play in it? Have we learned nothing but all the wrong lessons from Vietnam? The terrorists certainly know history, and how what they cannot win militarily, they can win through the media.
Competence, of course, brings us back to Iraq. Apparently and unfortunately, President Bush is right that the Democrats have no "plan for victory." (Neither does he, of course. Nor, for that matter, do I. But I don't claim to have one. And I didn't start it.) For national security in general, the Democrats' plan is so according-to-type that you cringe with embarrassment: It's mostly about new cash benefits for veterans. Regarding Iraq specifically, the Democrats' plan has two parts. First, they want Iraqis to take on "primary responsibility for securing and governing their country." Then they want "responsible redeployment" (great euphemism) of American forces.
Older readers may recognize this formula. It's Vietnamization -- the Nixon-Kissinger plan for extracting us from a previous mistake. But Vietnamization was not a plan for victory. It was a plan for what was called "peace with honor" and is now known as "defeat."
Maybe "A New Direction for America" is just a campaign document -- although it seems to have had no effect at all on the campaign. My fear is that the House Democrats might try to use it as a basis for governing.
It's late. Getting back to the Election and in closing this post, the words of Dean Barnett echoes some of my own feelings:
Let's be sure to comport ourselves with dignity and class right now. No shrieks of foulplay, no whining. There's no crying in politics, at least not in public. Let's remember what we want to do more than anything else - better our country. Sore loser antics won't help, and neither will slagging on our countrymen for not seeing things the way we did. We didn't make the sale, and that falls on us.
Losing is part of politics. Part of the Republican Party has forgotten that the past six years. Although it might be hard to see tonight, we can be a better party and a better country because of this setback.