Wed 8 Nov 2006
Some Thoughts on the ‘06 Elections
Posted by Nate under Nate
In the days leading up to November 8th, Republican pundits were in a lather, consumed by get-out-the-vote frenzy. The GOP’s best hope seemed to be feeding conservative delusions of maintining its vise-grip on Congress, if only you plebians would do your civic duty. Their campaign line? “Yes, we’re terrible, but the other guy is worse.” A party lacking any substance attacked their bitter foe for… lacking substance.
Unsurprisingly, this has led to a handy defeat of Karl Rove’s “permanent majority”.
At press time, the Senate is still a toss-up.
As the balloon of backbiting, recriminations and hand-wringing among the GOP swells up and bursts, drowning the pages of opinion colums across the country for the next several weeks, both parties should consider their respective victory and defeats.
Democrats: No, this isn’t your “Republican Revolution”. No, your slim lead doesn’t equate to a “mandate”. The majority of Americans do not want their taxes raised, national security compromised on the front page of the Times, or an ignominious retreat from Iraq - items which comprise the seeming majority of your vacuous “platform”. They also understand that increasing VA benefits is not a policy for national security.
You may be feeling a little itch somewhere in the back of your hungover, euphoric minds; that’s your “must gallop of to the left” impulse. I strongly suggest you ignore it. You were handed this electoral victory by a Republican Party that doesn’t deserve the name; cozy back up to Communist principles, and you’ll earn yourself a ticket back into the political wilderness in ‘08, where you can commence your soul-searching yet again. However, that aside, your support of moderate “Blue Dog” democrats in key races provides us center-right folks with a glimmer of hope that you can, one day, govern responsibly.
Republicans: Congratulations; your incompetence, arrogance and near-total abandonment of conservative principles has drug you behind the woodshed and given you a country ass-whuppin.
“Conservatives” in this country ask you to uphold a few key principles: Govern ethically (failed), shrink government (failed), reduce government spending (”failed” is far too kind a word, here) and use this reduced spending to decrease the national tax burden (your one shining star). Your failure, in my eyes, is a failure of the concept of “compassionate conservatism” - simply a pseudonym, apparently, for religious governance enjoying a late-night drunken tryst with complete fiscal irresponsibility. The Ted Haggard of political philosophy, if you will.
On top of that, we asked you to competently and quickly get a handle on illegal immigration (failed), live up to your vision of an “ownership society” by bringing some of that famed fiscal responsibility to the Social Security program (failed), and maybe take a serious look at completely overhauling our ridiculous, antiquated tax code (another campaign promise in ‘04, failed).
Most of us recognized the situation from 91-03 in Iraq as ridiculous and untenable, and supported a war there to oust the Hussein regime once and for all - WMD or no. You get a free pass for going in, but in regards to your gross mismanagement of the situation after your big “Mission Accomplished” announcement? Failed.
Notice a trend, here?
Now, as you toil for the next two years (at least) in the shadow of your Democratic Overlords, I’d like you to reconsider a few things:
1. As so-called “conservatives”, your goals as a party must center on spending reduction, tax reduction and entitlement reduction (or at least, reform). When you remember this and aggressively act on it, you win.
2. This is not government of the Jesus, by the Jesus and for the Jesus. Sure, there are 30 million evangelicals that are politically active in this country, but there are another 270 million people moved by the spectacle of Michael J. Fox being ravaged by a progressive and deadly disease. The stand on stem cell research is a killer for your party, regardless of whether there’s actually any conclusive science on the matter. You’ve lost the PR battle here long ago; let science march onward and leave this issue alone.
3. What in the fuck were you thinking, re: Terry Schiavo? Getting the Federal Government involved in a state-based right-to-die case was one of the grossest oversteps of Federal authority I can, in my 33 years, recall. In it’s entirety, it stood starkly against the principles of limited government that you frauds claim to champion. And in the end? You lost, and she’s feeding the worms. Finally. Well done.
4. Illegal immigration must be stopped, and you’re the only party that supposedly cares about stopping it. There’s plenty of room for debate about how to handle the multiple millions that are already here, yet there’s no excuse for the plaintive wails heard from the GOP about finally securing that goddamn border. And for all the pulling-of-teeth it took to get 700 miles of unguarded wall approved (a third too short, at that), now we’re just facing a congress that will likely defund it - making it unbuildable - because the party of Abraham Lincoln preferred Abramoff’s illicit cash to maintaining the ethics they claimed to champion in ‘94.
There’s plenty more to come, but I have other duties that need attention. Like Arnold, though… I’ll be back.
Update: George Will weighs in.
3 Responses to “ Some Thoughts on the ‘06 Elections ”
Comments:
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

November 16th, 2006 at 10:24 pm
It’s getting late and the boys will be up at 5:30am regardless of when I go to sleep so I’ll keep this short. Bravo!
One quick note on the fence… it was never gonna be built… after they passed the bill giving the fence to GW they then gave him permission to use the money allocated for it any way he chose as long as it went to border security… The fence was always and will always be a ruse… an 11th hour effort to secure a few votes in border states that didn’t mean shit in the long run! Please don’t blame the fence not being built on the Dems, it was never gonna happen to begin with.
November 22nd, 2006 at 2:06 pm
Yeah, I’d heard about that. Hence me referring to the Republicans as “supposedly” caring about border security.
It’s a fucking travesty, dude.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:13 am
The travesty IMO is that people actually think the fence will do any good. If you want to stop illegal immigration you have to remove the lure of work and to do that you have to go after the people who hire them. It’s funny, this same group thinks that in order to slove the drug problem in America you put the junkies in jail but they don’t hold the same belief with illegal immigration… Haul in a few business owners, fine them heavily and throw their asses in jail for hiring these border crossers and it will have a far more drastic effect than any fence. Ahhh but GW wants a guest worker program… He doesn’t want amnesty for the people crossing the border but has no problem giving it to those hiring the workers and then solving their problem of finding employees that are willing to work for less than adequate wages…