Time to get serious about the elections

We’re down to the wire, y’all…and some of these races are reeeeally close.

The Senate:

Projected Senate 2006

The House:

2006 projected House of Representatives

I don’t think it’s possible to overstate how important this election is. I’ve said it countless times–there’s too much at stake to turn over the House and/or Senate to the Democrats. It’s not just “gridlock” that’s going to happen; if that were all, I’d not be so vehemently exhorting you to donate, donate, donate and VOTE. This isn’t even “just” about taxes being raised–and make no mistake, when they talk about “rolling back the Bush tax cuts,” they’re talking about raising taxes. Don’t think it’ll just be “rolling back,” either. This isn’t about Democrat obstruction. You want to send Republicans a message, I get that. You’re mad at Bush for whatever reason? So don’t vote for him. Oh, wait…

You’re angry about the lack (as yet) of immigration reform? [Oh ye, of little faith...GMTA here.] The Democrats sure as hell aren’t going to even come close to giving you what you want. And worse, they can and will do damage being there, even if they do nothing at all about immigration. Not happy with the way things are going in Iraq and think Rumsfeld needs to go? Electing Democrats to the majority isn’t going to replace Rumsfeld. You might just be looking at cuts in funding for the war, though–don’t our military men and women deserve better than that? Do you think John Conyers’ little impeachment plan is going to help us in the war? Do you believe our troops will be given the tools to finish the job, with Democrats holding the purse strings? Have you become impatient in waiting for the war to be over, and don’t mind so much if the troops are pulled out of Iraq before things have stabilized? If so, have you seriously thought about what will become of Iraq if we leave–and who may end up going back to clean up the mess? What about Iraq’s neighbors? Do you realize that with Iraq being allowed to turn into another Taliban-like state–which it will–the world will become far more dangerous? And forget the blame: it really doesn’t matter in the end whether Bush or Clinton or the CIA or Ahmed Chalabi or Kurds or anyone else are to “blame” for ousting Saddam Hussein. What matters NOW is completing the mission, and the debate should be about how to do it. The Democrats don’t have a plan for victory–not in Iraq, not in Afghanistan, not anywhere we are fighting to defeat the cancer of Islamic extremism. Their only “plan” is “Bush Is Wrong,” and withdraw, appease, ignore the problem and hope it just goes away. And of course, also snipe at our allies (specifically, Israel) while they’re at it.

This is a war like no other–it’s not Vietnam, it’s not the Cold War–but there are lessons to be learned from both. Democrats let Saigon fall, and they’ll do the same with Baghdad. The Cold War was a long war waged on fronts all over the world, like this one, but unlike during the Cold War, the West now allows the enemy to operate literally under our noses, because we’re oh-so-tolerant. The enemy this time gets special protection because they wage war in the name of religion. It’s suicidal on our part, and the “tolerant” “progressives” and “liberals” (all scare quotes intentional) have handed the enemy their greatest weapons: our “tolerance” and lack of patience and resolve. Look at Europe and ask yourself, is that what you want in America? Because that’s the ideal for Democrats.

We CAN force our party to listen to us–we’ve done it already with many issues in the last couple of years. People raised their voices and immigration “reform” that was unpalatable to conservatives was stopped. We got Samuel Alito. The Dubai Ports World deal fell through (I personally think it should have gone through, but that issue is finished and it’s not a big enough deal to me to bother going through that argument again). We got the “earmarks” bill. If you’re a conservative and you look squarely at the issues, the worst you can say is that conservatives haven’t gotten everything they/we want accomplished–yet–and that they/we have had to fight for the things they/we want. But at least the left’s agenda hasn’t been pushed through! And note that I said “yet,” because the only way conservative issues have even a small chance of getting through is if Republicans hold the majority. You can’t play the game if you aren’t on the field. Immigration reform CAN happen with Republicans in the majority. Government spending CAN be controlled. Fighting terrorism WILL continue. Some things may not have happened to our liking yet, but they definitely won’t with Democrats, and we’d likely get the exact opposite.

To quote Hugh Hewitt, our issues are:

Win the war.
Confirm the judges.
Cut the taxes.
Control the spending.
Secure the borders.

You will get NONE of the above with the Democrats. Victory. VOTE. Give until it hurts.


Big Ten
 

Rightroots
 



Trackback URL | Respond

10 Responses to “Time to get serious about the elections”

  1. Gravatar
    Laney says:

    You really and truely have no idea that Iraq is lost. You think it is possible for a Western country to occupy and pacify a Moslem country if it just goes about it in the right way. Refusing to face facts doesn’t make you patriotic, virtuous, and strong. It just kills more Americans.



  2. Gravatar
    sierrahome says:

    This election is NOT the Socialists to win it is the Republicans to lose. If we show up I think we will easily hold both houses. Once that is done hold onto your hats because it’s only going to get worse. I think the whole Foley mess came out 2 weeks early as the socialists realized the inevitable. Just go vote and we will win and maybe the likes of Murtha will be in the dust.



  3. Gravatar
    Talmadge East says:

    First off I don’t know anyone, from any political stripe, that actually thinks government works better with one party controlling everything. As a loyal Republican you don’t have to admit it, but more meaningful legisltaion would get passed if one of the two chambers was controlled by a different party. It worked in the 1990’s and it would work now.

    Now I don’t think the President’s Iraq policy will drasticlly change inless the Democrats control both Chambers, but I believe Laney’s correct in saying that your partisan view has blinded you to the realities of Iraq. Look at what the people we are “helping” think about us. According to a recent poll by the Project on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA), Iraqis, by a 5 to 2 margin, thought that a U.S. commitment to withdraw would “strengthen the Iraqi government.” Three out of four believe an American withdrawal would make the various factions in Iraq’s parliament more willing to cooperate with one another.

    Eight out of ten Iraqis believe the U.S. military presence is “provoking more conflict than it is preventing,” and they’re in the position to know best. Just 14 percent said the U.S. forces were having “a positive influence on the situation in Iraq.”

    I am sorry, but if they want us gone, I’m all for leaving.



  4. Gravatar
    Common Folk Using Common Sense says:

    We’re A Month Away

    In four weeks there will be an election in the US. If the Democrats take over Congress this election it will be because way too many Conservatives spent Election Tuesday on their fat butts sipping overpriced coffee instead of stepping into a polling …



  5. Gravatar
    Stop The ACLU says:

    The Border Fence Bill Will Be Signed

    I never wrote about the speculation by Mickey Kaus on a pocket veto of the Border Fence Bill because I really didn’t understand it and I didn’t want to jump the gun. Well, according to Captain Ed, the Presiden’t support for this is …



  6. Gravatar
    raz0r says:

    Amen sister.



  7. Gravatar
    William Teach says:

    You really and truely have no idea that Iraq is lost. You think it is possible for a Western country to occupy and pacify a Moslem country if it just goes about it in the right way. Refusing to face facts doesn’t make you patriotic, virtuous, and strong. It just kills more Americans.

    Sorry, Laney, but that is a democratic talking point and a feeling, with no basis in reality. Good thing todays liberals weren’t in charge during the American revolution. We would still be part of the British empire.

    You and your ilk want Iraq to be lost. How sad is it that one of the two American political parties has put its hope in winning back Congress and the White House on America losing on all fronts? Pretty damn sad.

    Great post, Beth. Our GOP Congress critters are not perfect, and do not always do what the base wants, but, at least they are our critters, and want America to succeed, not fail. That is what some of the weak knee’d folks on our side who are getting wishy washy about the 2006 elections do not seem to be getting.



  8. Gravatar
    Laney says:

    Laney said the war is lost and William Teach said

    > Sorry, Laney, but that is a democratic talking point and a feeling, with no basis in reality

    Which I suppose is why WF Buckley said

    http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200602241451.asp” rel=”nofollow”>
    Iraq is lost. Get over it. And stop killing Americans out of stubborn ignorance.



  9. Gravatar
    Laney says:

    Laney said the war is lost and William Teach said

    > Sorry, Laney, but that is a democratic talking point and a feeling, with no basis in reality

    Which I suppose is why WF Buckley said

    http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200602241451.asp” rel=”nofollow”> One can’t doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed.

    Iraq is lost. Get over it. And stop killing Americans out of stubborn ignorance.



  10. Gravatar
    William Teach says:

    You lefties have been saying Iraq was lost even before it started. You WANT it to be lost. And you can feel that it is lost, but, truth will win out.

    Why do you pin your hopes on winning Congressional seats on America losing?



Hey you...leave a comment!