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

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
OK, so you're saying that as long as Republicans you disliked were tossed, losing the war on terror is OK. Got it.

The GOP deserved to lose. Although it would most likely have been in the country's best interest for some of the GOP congresscritters not to have gotten what they would have deserved, they made a number of mistakes that probably cost them a fraction of a percent here, a fraction of a percent there, etc. Sheer stupidity. Why, for example, did they squeeze in that "internet gambling" nonsense? There are enough on-line poker players, many of whom would have voted Republican, that such a boneheaded move could easily have cost the Republicans 0.1% of the vote. Sure, that's not much, but when a race is going to be close a candidate shouldn't throw away votes like that.

Ironically, my biggest concerns are about whether Republicans will fumble after their loss, and whether our enemies will pick up a dangerous message from the election. The loss of power itself doesn't concern me nearly so much.

Indeed, if it weren't for those issues ("Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?") this loss could actually be a good thing for the people in Iraq. The Congress doesn't have the authority to yank us out of Iraq instantly, and giving the Iraqis a warning that they must become self-sufficient within two years would be better than having us win this one bug lose the presidency in 2008 (in which case the Iraqis would be left stranded without warning). Unfortunately, I fear Bush et al. may be tired of having to support the war effort when they're being undermined by enemies within the U.S. Can't say I necessarily blame them, but the Iraqi timetable is probably going to be rushed too much as a result.

23 posted on 11/08/2006 4:31:34 PM PST by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: supercat
The Congress doesn't have the authority to yank us out of Iraq instantly

No, they just have the authority to require it as a precondition of critical spending bills that cannot be vetoed.

25 posted on 11/08/2006 4:33:16 PM PST by BeHoldAPaleHorse (I dare call it treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: supercat
Why, for example, did they squeeze in that "Internet gambling" nonsense?

Then there was that plan, floated the week before the election, to spend $50 million to convince adults not to have sex. I think it's possible that the Republicans threw this election, so that they can campaign in '08 as the 'out' party.

133 posted on 11/08/2006 7:18:41 PM PST by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

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