It seems that just about everyone is expressing their opinion on what happened Tuesday, and I wish to do so too. The Democrats took both houses of Congress, and the Republicans are lementing their loss. Many blame the Conservatives who kept their promise to stay home. What is crazy is that those same people point to the same election and say that it is proof that the Republicans need to become more “moderate”, in other words they have to become more Liberal. How do people with this clearly contradictory logic end up getting on all the talk shows as respected and wise commentators?
You look at those Republicans that lost, and for the most part (not in every case) it was the “moderate” Republicans that were fired by the voters. You look at the Democrats that won in races against incumbant Republicans and you see that most of them were quite Conservative by Democratic standards. Those Democrats that are in Congressional Districts that are not particularly strongholds for either party know that they cannot win when they campaign as Leftist-Liberals, they only have a chance when they run as “moderates”.
I think it is clear that this country, with the exception of those living in densely-populated urban centers, prefer to be governed by Conservatives. They don’t want Leftist Democrats, and they don’t want Republican frauds who use their party affiliation to imply that they are for smaller government, lower taxes, and less spending only to get into office and spend like Democrats.
Many are saying that the election was a referrendum on the Iraq war. Maybe it is, but what do you expect? The mainstream media sends its corrospondents to Iraq to report what goes on, they tend to stay within a three-block radius of their hotel in Baghdad, and despite the fact that our troops tell us things are going well when they come home while the reporters follow the old principle that “if it bleeds, it leads”. I may be wrong, but I suspect that the mojority of Americans share my view on Iraq. I want the troops to come home, I want to get out of Iraq, but I don’t wish to do so in such a way that the Jihadists will get away with saying that we tucked tail and ran. Many on the Left think that if we leave, the Jihadists will leave us alone, and I don’t see any evidence that that is the case. In fact, even Nassralla, the head of Hizbollah in Lebanon, said that he expects Americans to do what we did in Viietnam, that is leave with Vietnamese soldiers clinging to the skids of helicopters for fear of being slaughtered by the Communists upon our exit. No, I think that Iraq had considerably less to do with this election than the MSM would have us believe.
Now I am not a Republican. I favor the Consitution Pary, and given a choice that is how I vote. However, I tend to vote for the most conservative candidate on the ballot, even if that means the Republican. As an aside, I have noticed that it seems to me that when the Republicans put up a true Conservative, the Constitution Party tends not to put anyone up. I don’t know if that is coincidence or intentional though. If it is intentional, I hope that the Republicans will pay attention.
A few of the true-blue Conservative talkshow hosts that I listen to really get it. They understand that the Republican losses on Tuesday are a good thing in that it gives the Republicans an excellent opportunity for a wake-up call. If they will now go back to their own party platform, and recognize that the reason they gained the Congress in 1994 was because the “Contract with America” promised true Conservative ideals would be advocated by those running for office. If they stick to the “move leftward”/neo-con trend that they have been following since W. was first elected, then we are in deep trouble, and I can guarantee that we will see a Rodham administration begin in January of 2009.