Is 2008 The New 1964?

National Review ^ | August 7, 2007 | John Derbyshire

[JohnBovenmyer]

If Paul were to stay in and run as a 3rd party he’d draw much more from Hillary than from the GOP nominee. Normal GOP voters find his stand on the WOT appalling and no one is paying any attention to anything else he’s saying. The MSM will keep the focus on his anti-war position. Once HIllary fakes to the middle for the general election the nutroots will flock to Paul as the sure surrender (and legal pot candidate) compared to a Hillary who voted for the war and will sound pretty wobbly come October.

[CenTexConfederate]

You are so very wrong. Even solid long time conservatives see the Iraq war for the disaster it is.

[boop]

1964 was a special year because of the JFK assassination. LBJ basically ran on a sympathy ticket. It was to be JFK’s “second term”. No way a republican was going to win that year. 1968 would be a good analogy because it is wide open for both parties to win, and we have a lot of debates about where we are going as a society. Further left, or a return to sanity? Don’t forget that the dems were attacked from the RIGHT in their party via Wallace. Now the dems are going harder left than they ever have, and bragging about it. I agree with Paul on about everything but Iraq, but he isn’t going anywhere with mainstream America.

[JohnBovenmyer]

The war is doing ok. Bush never said it would be easy. Much the contrary. And all the other GOP candidates agree on the need for the war, they just have different ideas on how to improve it. Corruption in Iraqi politics has kept the political situation lagging. Iraq needs another round of elections to vote out those they think have failed and vote in those they think have promise. They don't need an election as much as Israel and maybe the time isn't quite right to hold them - give the surge a bit more time to work. We might tweak the Rules of Engagement a bit. Not being able to shoot back at our worst enemies... the press, is hurting morale on the home front. It would help if Bush would even talk back to them, but although he does bite overseas at home he's a toothless Basenji.

9/11 showed that we can no longer afford to ignore the lunatic fringe in the Middle East. Our own progress has given them the technology to hurt us too much and our petrodollars have given them funding beyond their wildest dreams. They hate us for our success and as lunatics reason won't stop them. Stratigically there are only three choices for us: (1) Lose. This means lose EVERYTHING we value because the opposition won't settle for less than unconditional surrender and won't stop unless someone kills them, which this avoids. (2) Take out all of Islam and send Allah to join the Aztec gods. Although simple to explain this is a BIG task. Heck, even Cortez crossed the Atlantic to fight the unknown rather than to extend the Reconquista across Africa. (3) Take out the hopeless extremists of current Islam and hope and pray that the the quieter masses can be kept passive for now and eventually brought into a modern society. This is hard to explain and sell as strategy and it requires a large dose of faith to accept that it has any chance to work. However, the enormous up front costs of (1) and (2) make it foolhardy to not consider (3) and give it a fair chance. Don't repeat Hitler's mistakes - invade Russia then declare war on US after Pearl Harbor before finishing off Churchill. Try to get the high priority targets first.

The Democrats claim that (1) is cheap. I'd like them to try an experiment in Federalism. Before they impose complete defeat on the rest of this why don't they try it. How about President Limbaugh with 80% hard core conservatives, 10% RHINOs and 10% Democrats in the House and Senate. Leave the left Vermont and Oakland as enclaves for pedagogical reasons. Rush et. al. would be nicer than the lunatics to the losers. He'd just impeach the left's judges and replace them with Scalia clones. Maybe jail a few of the most obnoxious for treason. Bin Laden would behead the liberal judges, along with most of the MSM and Hollywood. After four terms of Limbaugh (David would follow Rush) then we could ask the left if they still favor defeat.

[t_skoz]

"If the revolution had failed, the way you wish"

Are you feeling well? Seriously. It's a quote from another FReeper. Take a look at my profile page to see it in context if you are confused.

[SunkenCiv]

Democratic Debacle (1964 convention, repercussions today)
America Heritage | July 2004 (cover date) | Joshua Zeitz
Posted on 07/28/2004 12:59:49 AM EDT by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1179981/posts

[RockinRight]

Ron Paul is NOT Barry Goldwater. Not even close.

Fred Thompson is more a Goldwater than Paul...and Fred’s no Goldwater either.