To: free me
Actually, I thought the article made some good points.
NOT that the GOP somehow "deserves to lose" but that the Party is a bit stale and needs some kind of invigoration.
I don't feel that losing is a MUST for this, though. However, the history of Parties does make the losing streak the perfect imputes for such an invigoration!
And the article pegged the emptiness of the Democrat's position perfectly!
To: Mobile Vulgus
"I don't feel that losing is a MUST for this, though. However, the history of Parties does make the losing streak the perfect imputes for such an invigoration!
And the article pegged the emptiness of the Democrat's position perfectly!"
Those two points are contradictory. If losing led to invigoration why aren't the Democrats invigorated?
7 posted on
10/25/2006 2:34:27 AM PDT by
Moral Hazard
("No we all can't be Superfly GQPhdFBI")
To: Mobile Vulgus
I don't think the 'pubs need to lose either, but the article did make some good points.It would be nice if others would read first and comment afterwards as well.
10 posted on
10/25/2006 2:41:19 AM PDT by
free me
To: Mobile Vulgus
You contradict yourself and expose the CNN article when you say the article pegs the Democrat's emptiness perfectly. They lost 12 years ago. Ideally they would have been reinvigorated, renewed, and full of new ideas on how to govern. So, what have they got? Cut and run and Foley. That's what 12 years out of power did for them.
16 posted on
10/25/2006 3:11:10 AM PDT by
saganite
(Billions and billions and billions-------and that's just the NASA budget!)
To: Mobile Vulgus
However, the history of Parties does make the losing streak the perfect imputes for such an invigoration!The dems haven't held the House in more than 12 years.....when will they get invigotated? LOL
30 posted on
10/25/2006 5:17:30 AM PDT by
Puppage
(You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson