Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RED NATION RISING
11/16/2004 | YDR

Posted on 11/16/2004 6:32:51 PM PST by You Dirty Rats

All of the "Red State, Blue State" talk is nonsense, as are the discussions on Blue State secession, the needless worrying by Conservatives, and the whistling past the graveyard by Leftists praying for a miracle. The Election is over and the result is a clear, decisive victory for the Republicans. When the Congress is sworn in next January, Red Nation will be officially in power.

There is a reason so many of the Lefties have lost their heads. It's funny, really. Their era is over and they know it. The decades of dominance from FDR on down started to turn our way with the 1994 election; now, the completion of the job is at hand.

Remember the Imperial Congress of the 1980's? Remember Tip O'Neill, Jim Wright, Tom Foley, and George Mitchell? Remember how they dogged our great President, Ronald Reagan, on everything from Iran-Contra to Bork? I sure do. They ran roughshod over all of us. Whenever we though we had won -- they changed the rules and we lost, or at least tied.

We could win the Presidency, but not Congress, and certainly not the Supreme Court. Part of the latter problem was sending up bad choices, to be sure, but Nixon couldn't get two if his choices through -- so he ended up with Blackmun. Reagan also had trouble, ending up with Kennedy as Justice because of the Bork fiasco. So our Presidential triumphs after the long days of FDR, Truman, JFK, Johnson and Carter just weren't enough. We were NOT the real power in Washington. We were gradually making headway, but we couldn't sustain it. The South was in the balance. It was tentatively moving to the Republicans .. but the momentum just wasn't enough. Reagan was gone, Bush wasn't dynamic or a Party-Builder ...

Enter Bill Clinton. Like Nixon, he was a man of questionable character and uncertain political principles. Like Nixon, he possessed a tremendous understanding of American politics. It was clear to Clinton that the trend in this country was to the Right and the Democratic Leadership Conference, with him at the forefront, attempted to capitalize on this trend. Unfortunately for Clinton and the Democratic Party, the latter loved him as a candidate but totally disagreed with his relative moderation. The fringe groups that controlled the Democratic Party since at least 1972 tightened their grip. January 1993 was their signal. They had the Presidency and both houses of Congress. Nothjing could stop them. The Hillary Health Plan was inevitable, as was the total triumph of the Left ...

But they didn't have the votes. They never did. Too many Democrats simply didn't buy into the agenda of the Left, particularly Southern Democrats. It was time for a REAL change, and in the 1994 election, the Republicans were ready to start the return to power ...

The 1994 capture of the House by the Repblicans shocked the Democrats. It ended the Clinton Presidency that the Left had wanted. Clinton, domestically, was forced to go along with Republican reforms to keep his job. Everything was on the line in 2000, but the close election and uncertain victory for a Washington newcomer did not mean the Left was done yet. They got Jeffords to jump; The Senate was still a source of power and a check on real reform. Surely, the 2002 election would see this weak, foolish, reckless cowboy lead his party to defeat and allow the Democrats to add seats in the Senate, and perhaps retake the House. Everything was still OK ...

Election evening, 2002. For the first time, a sitting President added Senators. The weak, stupid, bumbling, dangerous cowboy actually lead a Senate takeover! For the first time in decades, the Democrats were locked out of power. This could not be! Government power was and is the source of the Democratic Party -- they could not be locked out! Better people, more compassionate people, smarter, more cultured ... how could they not be in power? Is our era over? Are we through? Is James Carville's head in the trash can where we really are? WHO DID THIS TO US, they all said.

January, 2003. The new Congress convenes. All the Democrats have is a minority in the Senate to block via filibuster. The Supreme Court was still narrowly tilted Left, as were the Courts in general; this could not be reversed! In desperation, having no alternative other than surrender, the filibuster of Court nominees was adopted. This was justified because the President was a minority President and the nomiees were extreme (i.e. not in the tank for the Left).

While this rear-guard action went on, preparations for the decisive 2004 Election were underway. There was no more room for losses; any further loss of Senate seats, and the filibuster would give way. Loss of the White House, along with loss of the filibuster, meant loss of the Supreme Court and all remaining Federal Power. Losing was not an option. The entire Left establishment, built in the 1960's with roots in the 1930's, was in peril. It had to be saved -- for the children, the elderly, the sick, minorities, women, elite university graduates, government workers, gays and lesbians, environmentalists, artists, feminists, inhabitants of the cities and the Coasts, and other important groups. In their blindness, they look at these groups and convinced themselves that they represented an overwhelming majority. How could they not? Their only opposition was white middle-aged healthy uneducated straight uncultured males living in the rural South.

So the entire establishment signed on -- including an unprecedented contribution by the formerly mainstream media. The Left was in trouble, but the real causes of this decline were set aside and a visceral hatred of the President was substituted. The Campaign began right after the 2002 Election and continued for two years. The War on Terror, the Economy, permitting votes to fill vacant seats in the Courts; all were sacrificed in pursuit of the desperate attack on the President and the win-at-all-costs mentality of the politicians and media of the Left. The very credibility and pretense of objectivity of the press was tossed into the raging fire of hatred and distortion. Bush had to be defeated! Losing is not an option.

Results of November 2,2004: The President is re-elected by over 61 million votes and 51% of the total. MANDATE.

The Seante goes to 55 Republicans, enough to break filibusters. MANDATE MANDATE.

The House increases its Republicans to over 230. MANDATE MANDATE MANDATE.

The President will be able to get his judicial nominees through. The Supreme Court will become Consevative. MANDATE MANDATE MANDATE MANDATE.

The Democratic rule since 1932 is over. The South is now solidly Republican. The Future of the Democratic Party is bleak. Reform on Taxes, Social Security and othe rdomestic concerns is inevitable in 2005. The President is going to secure peace and freedom in much of the Middle East, and win the War on Terror.

The President will now have the ability to get all of his agenda through the Congress -- affecting all states, Red and Blue.

Red Nation Has Risen.


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bush; bushcountry; bushvictory; mandate; republicanmajority; senate; victory

1 posted on 11/16/2004 6:32:52 PM PST by You Dirty Rats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

I think it would be more accurate if red counties and blue counties were counted. check the map printed by USA today


2 posted on 11/16/2004 6:37:35 PM PST by G-Man 1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

I hope you're right, but certain demographic trends are in favor of the Democrats. Unending mass immigration no doubt helps the Democrats, as the faster growing segment of the population -- Hispanics -- typcially favor the Dems by large margins. Now of course IF Bush really did win 44% of the latino vote two weeks ago, then perhaps it signifies a shift, but I think you need more than one election to declare a trend.


3 posted on 11/16/2004 6:38:37 PM PST by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G-Man 1
I think it would be more accurate if red counties and blue counties were counted. check the map printed by USA today

I do not care about red/blue counties any more than I care about red/blue states. The Bush Presidency and our clear majority in Congress applies to all of them. That's my point.

4 posted on 11/16/2004 6:39:48 PM PST by You Dirty Rats (31 Red States - All Your Senate Are Belong To Us!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Aetius

We do have a very strong grip on the House and Senate. In the Senate, Bush won 31 states. If anything, I think over time we'll pick up more seats. If we get our agenda through in the next two years, and SCOTUS appointments over the next four, our House & Senate strength will see us through even if we lose the Presidency. That's how the 'Rats maintained power for decades. Now it's our turn!


5 posted on 11/16/2004 6:42:08 PM PST by You Dirty Rats (31 Red States - All Your Senate Are Belong To Us!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

bump


6 posted on 11/16/2004 6:42:36 PM PST by foreverfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G-Man 1

It's even more stark of a picture for the Democrats when you realize that taking the urban areas out of the picture California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan and Pennsyvania all turn red. If they were to make good on their threat to secede they would have to do so not by states but by individual cities except in the case of New England.

The Rats, therefore, occupy islands of urban liberalism in an ocean of red which makes the funny idea of forming reservations for liberals even more appropriate.


7 posted on 11/16/2004 6:46:32 PM PST by Neville72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

Well I definitely agree that we should implement as much of the conservative agenda as possible now and in the near future just in case things go against us in the future.

Certain issues, like gay marriage/civil unions, must be one over the next few years. A Sup Court decision affirming the rights of states to settle the matter and upholding the federal Defense of Marriage Act would be great, but the problem there would be that it could be reversed by a later court. We need some sort of Amendment that precludes the Courts from getting involved, or that reverses a potential imposition of gay marriage/civil unions should it happen.

Its also important to try and make the tax cuts permanent and reform Social Security.

And we need more Scalias and Thomas on the Sup Court, not only for the marriage debate, but for the more general purpose of reigning in judicial power.

So I agree; do as much as possible as soon as possible.


8 posted on 11/16/2004 6:48:50 PM PST by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

Thanks to Ronald Reagan and Rush Limbagh!

JMO


9 posted on 11/16/2004 6:49:46 PM PST by diamond6 (Everyone who is for abortion has already been born. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: diamond6

yep, you are right. People underestimate Rush Limbaugh,,,he is vastly important.


10 posted on 11/16/2004 6:54:58 PM PST by cajungirl (Kerry:Bad for Geese, Bad for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Aetius

Latinos voted for the Republicans in unprecedented numbers because most are family-oriented Catholics, and the Catholic Church actually intervened in this election, really for the first time, by suggesting that a vote for a pro-choice candidate over a pro-life candidate was complicity with abortion and therefore a mortal sin.

Church-going Catholics, for the first time, voted massively for Bush. This is what accounts for the Hispanic shift.

The problem, of course, is that this is a one-issue shift, and that issue is abortion. Therefore, to maintain the shift, the Republicans MUST deliver pro-choice judges.

And the problem with that is that they are in serious danger of elevating Arlen Specter to the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

IF the Republicans keep their head (and Borking Specter would be a good indication that they are keeping their head), then they will be able to keep this coalition by advancing on values, and Hispanic immigration will end up favoring the Republicans over the long term.


11 posted on 11/16/2004 7:05:56 PM PST by Vicomte13 (La nuit s'acheve!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

It started turning long before '94. What happened in 94 was simply the rising tide broke over the seawall for the first time.


12 posted on 11/16/2004 7:40:16 PM PST by festus (Imperialism Shall Rise Again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

Ya-HOO!


13 posted on 11/16/2004 7:46:12 PM PST by Ciexyz (Bush still rules. The sun shines over America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

Red Bump This.


14 posted on 11/16/2004 7:49:42 PM PST by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin (Freedom is the freedom to discipline yourself so others don't have to do it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

Unfortunatly, 55 votes is NOT enough to break a filibuster. We need 60.


15 posted on 11/16/2004 7:50:30 PM PST by TheRealDBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: festus
It started turning long before '94. What happened in 94 was simply the rising tide broke over the seawall for the first time.

I agree, in a broad sense. It started as early as the 1964 campaign, and we made a lot of progress during the 1980's.

16 posted on 11/16/2004 8:31:05 PM PST by You Dirty Rats (31 Red States - All Your Senate Are Belong To Us!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TheRealDBear
Unfortunatly, 55 votes is NOT enough to break a filibuster. We need 60.

We'll get some Democratic Senators from Red States. There is also the nucular option, which really needs only 50 votes. Either way, I don't believe the 'Rats will be able to stop the tide. Nobody wants to end up like Daschle.

17 posted on 11/16/2004 8:34:43 PM PST by You Dirty Rats (31 Red States - All Your Senate Are Belong To Us!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead; GoldwaterChick

Ping


18 posted on 11/16/2004 8:35:28 PM PST by You Dirty Rats (31 Red States - All Your Senate Are Belong To Us!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats; TheRealDBear
The Seante goes to 55 Republicans, enough to break filibusters.

Not only is 60 the number (not 55) but you forget the RINO factor..

The RINOs are not "moderate Republicans". They are socialists.

Lincoln Chafee? You honestly count him as a "Republican"?

The liberals control the Senate. The Republicans control the battle of the "letter"--"R" is bigger than "D".

But face this fact. The LIBERALS control the Senate. The Democrats + Jeffords + the Chafee type Marxists in the Republican Party gives the Senate majority to the liberals.

19 posted on 11/16/2004 8:47:15 PM PST by Dont_Tread_On_Me_888 (John Kerry--three fake Purple Hearts. George Bush--one real heart of gold.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont_Tread_On_Me_888
You'd need 6 Rinos to deprive the Republicans of the 50 votes necessary to suspend the filibuster. The upshot is that the Republicans won't be able to suspend the filibuster right away. But if the Dems get too obstructionist, then the leadership will be able to get its 50 votes. I think the Dems will back off before that point.

"Red Nation" is rising, but damn, that almost sounds like something Gus Hall might have applauded.

20 posted on 11/17/2004 9:35:59 AM PST by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

Read this last night. Splendid overview. Thanks.


21 posted on 11/17/2004 10:02:07 AM PST by pke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead

Actually, the title was a takeoff on Tom Clancy's novel. I'm surprised nobody picked up on that. Guess it's been too long since the Soviet Union had that enormous Red Army.


22 posted on 11/17/2004 10:13:18 AM PST by You Dirty Rats (31 Red States - All Your Senate Are Belong To Us!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

I suspected that book title was your inspiration. One of Clancy's best - and big enough to make into a decent-sized miniseries. Do you recall how the action began in that novel?


23 posted on 11/17/2004 11:07:13 AM PST by Charles Martel ("Diplomats. The best diplomat I know of is a fully loaded phaser bank" - Cdr. Montgomery Scott)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Vicomte13

Well for Hispanic immigration, or any immigration for that matter, to benefit the GOP they would by definition have to win more immigrant votes than the Democrats do. Even if Bush did win 44% of the latino vote (assuming here that the naturalized Hispanic vote was similar to the overall Hispanic vote) , he still lost by 10 points among them.

And the big question is whether or not Bush's results are the harbinger of a real trend, or are they anonmaly? Will the GOP nominee in 2008 be able to maintain 40-45% of the latino vote against Hillary?


24 posted on 11/17/2004 2:28:06 PM PST by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Aetius

If the Republicans play their cards right (and with the Specter business, they are playing their cards very, very badly right now), in 2008 the Hispanic vote will split almost evenly for the Republicans and Democrats, and will trend Republican. The trick is to remember that Latinos are more Catholic than ethnic. Appeal to Catholics consistently and deliver on their issues, and you will get the Latin vote along with the rest of the Catholic vote.


25 posted on 11/17/2004 3:07:16 PM PST by Vicomte13 (La nuit s'acheve!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Charles Martel
"Do you recall how the action began in that novel?"

I recall. Muslim terrorists.

I think that was my favorite Clancy book. There were so many places in Europe mentioned that I had actually been to myself. Clancy was able to explain the "plan" for war in Europe. I found that book to be enlightening and fascinating!

26 posted on 11/17/2004 3:19:10 PM PST by Radix (Will the last person out please turn off the Tag Lines?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead
Not clear what you mean. You need 60--not--50 to kill the filibuster.

My point was that there are a significant number of liberals that are Republican in the Senate. It would be impossible to kill the filibuster, unless they "go nuclear" with Dick Cheney as describled below: (see full article why Cheney is important as President of the Senate)

Excerpt:

Their approach calls for employing a rarely used parliamentary tactic to overturn current Senate procedures.

Under the strategy envisioned by Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), among others, the Republicans would strip any Senate minority — currently the Democrats — of their ability to filibuster presidential nominees.

Approval by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (Tenn.), which is being sought, would all but assure that the plan would go forward.

Under the most likely scenario now under discussion, they would secure a ruling from the chair that Senate Rule XXII does not apply to executive submissions to the Senate — and that includes judicial nominees. Rule XXII provides for unlimited debate on all legislative issues that reach the floor unless three-fifths of the Senate calls a halt.

With such an approach, a favorable ruling from the chair on limiting the scope of Rule XXII could stand after only a simple majority approved it.

End excerpt.

Here is URL to full article:

Hatch group may go ‘nuclear’ on judges Plan would limit use of Rule XXII in Dem filibusters

27 posted on 11/17/2004 4:02:10 PM PST by Dont_Tread_On_Me_888 (John Kerry--three fake Purple Hearts. George Bush--one real heart of gold.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats
Actually a line veto is mandatory..
ALL pork needs to land on the Presidents LAP..
Which ever party is president..
PORK can then find the ultimate owner..
PORK can THEN be political suicide.. the way its should be..

The odds of it(that) happening... ZERO....
For obvious reasons but the discussion would be telling..
A real out'ing party..

28 posted on 11/17/2004 4:18:33 PM PST by hosepipe (Camp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont_Tread_On_Me_888
Not clear what you mean. You need 60--not--50 to kill the filibuster.

You need 60 to invoke cloture on a particular debate. But if you wanted to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominees altogether, you only need 50. 60 is just set by Senate rules, which can lawfully be changed at any time by a majority vote, parliamentary rules be damned. If the President sends over a nomination, and 50 Senators plus the VP caucus and approve, that meets the requirements of the Constitution. In essence, you just ignore the rules.

29 posted on 11/17/2004 8:42:57 PM PST by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Vicomte13

I hope you're right. But I must admit, I don't believe that Bush did as well with Hispanics this year as the exit polls indicate. I think he did better, but I think it was more along the lines of the former high-water mark of Republicans; Reagan's 37% in 1984.

I just hope their isn't something about Hillary that excites the latino community. If not, then I can see maybe getting about 40% in 08.

But again, I hope you're right about this and I'm wrong.


30 posted on 11/18/2004 6:22:33 PM PST by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

Let the blue go ...

As I heard one person state ... we can take all of our money and intellectual know how and be gone...

I wish I knew who said it because they forgot something ...

Red staes have all the food and need I say ... guns!

I wonder who will last longer? I can just see the VP of some company having to kill his food and live in a dwelling without all of the "finer things". Come to think of it, can you order sushi in Iowa?

Don't forget to pray for our brave men and women!

God Bless Our Troops and God Bless America!!!


31 posted on 11/18/2004 6:49:35 PM PST by print 'em
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats

The only thing I don't understand about the Red State/Blue State issue is why are the Republicans Red and the Dems blue, and not the other way round?

Red is the color of Communism, socialism and labor movements the world over and Blue is the color of Conservatism worldwide except here in America.


32 posted on 11/18/2004 8:20:42 PM PST by Wil H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson