Seth whined:

What is embarrassing is that they were beaten by a party without a platform, a party that stands for nothing except heavy taxation, zero morals, weak defenses, more rights for sex offenders and other criminals than for the law abiding citizen, oppressive political correctness, racism, America last, revising the Constitution to the point of non-recognizability, legislating through the courts and socialism.

The Republicans lost because they botched the war on terror by invading Iraq and prosecutinng that war with extreme incompetence.

The Republicans lost because, your wishful thinking aside, Republicans are not morally superior & folks are sick & tired of the suggestion they might be.

The Republicans lost because of the list of lies you print in the above paragraph regarding your 'descriptions' of Democrat positions. This sort of rightwing fanatacism has been discredited. Sorry.

You should be glad to have Democratic voices of reason back in congress. If it weren't for progressive liberals you all would be working sixteen hour days in factories/coalmines with your children alongside.

Have a nice day.

Arthur --

What I have stated in my post is totally accurate.

The primary reason we lost is that our politicians failed to refute the lies told by the MSM and the likes of Dem politicians, leaving the public to believe what they read.

Secondary is the fact that the Republicans in Congress were not doing their jobs, pure and simple.

The description of the state of affairs in Iraq as told by the left is as much a fiction as Hansel & Gretel, and as we shall see within the next two years should the Dems tamper with the tax cuts, homeland security or the War On Terror, there will be tangible effects.

Any terrorist attacks occurring on our soil after the Dems have made any changes at all in the Patriot Act, for example, will be ONLY because of those changes and PURELY the Democrats' fault.

So I wish the Democrats the best of luck, they wanted this mess, they've got it.

Given that the economy has gotten steadily better and unemployment is at its lowest in many years, should either of these things change for the worse, the Republicans will have 0% blame -- it will be because the Dems in Congress reversed what was working, period.

This is going to be great, you won't have a Republican majority to blame if things go to blazes -- there will be no coincidence, LOL -- any reversal of our national fortunes will be 100% because the Dems took over.

Heh, heh....

GOP needs to reactivate their base.

Haggard in 2008.

Seth,
Am still trying to reconcile
"a party that stands for nothing except heavy taxation, zero morals, weak defenses, more rights for sex offenders and other criminals than for the law abiding citizen, oppressive political correctness, racism, America last,.."
with
"We do not emulate the Democrats and whine, cry foul, become "depressed" for the next few years, slander the winners..."
you sound a tad "depressed" to me...or perhaps
frustration..hard for me to determine with my
zero morals. :) I walk in your moccasins: my
vote lost again in Idaho, as it has since Lewis
& Clark. *sigh*

Arthur --

I know you're not talking about Ted Haggard, LOL!

BB --

That was my first and last lament.

After this, I'm just going to sit back and watch what happens, knowing whose fault it will be and, knowing there's little we can do about it as citizens, making the most of it as the economy returns to pre-tax cut levels and we begin losing the War On Terror.

If I hear a shred of blame heading to starboard from the Democrats, however, all bets are off.

I can do "I told you so", I suppose, as things develop...

What we need in this country, apparently, are a whole lot more of your fellow Idahoans.

Arthur --

I know you're not talking about Ted Haggard, LOL!

Indeed I am. The quintessential, highly moral Christian evangelical of the age.

Easily the basest of the Republican base.

Seth,
"What we need in this country, apparently, are a whole lot more of your fellow Idahoans."
....he's all yours!

from W-pedia
In 2002, addressing "brain fade" and memory problems he has suffered since a 1998 car wreck, Sali said, "Much of the time in the Legislature, critical-thinking skills are not necessarily needed."[3]

As the result of a heated argument during the 2006 legislative session, retiring Idaho House Speaker Bruce Newcomb of Burley, a Republican, was quoted saying, "That idiot (Sali) is just an absolute idiot. He doesn’t have one ounce of empathy in his whole fricking body. And you can put that in the paper." Sali claims Newcomb doesn't like him because he outmaneuvered the speaker on several legislative matters. In 2004, Newcomb temporarily stripped Sali of the chairmanship of the Idaho House Health and Welfare Committee. [4]

Newcomb's predecessor as Speaker, U.S. Congressman Mike Simpson, once told Sali in session, "If you want to debate this, I’ll put the House at ease and we can go back into my office and I’ll throw you out the window." Republican colleagues joked off-the-record that the third floor office might not be high enough. (Simpson has since endorsed Sali for Congress, despite the earlier confrontation.) Various Republican colleagues have called him, on the record, an "opportunist," "disruptive," and a "bully." [5]

Sali has repeateadly asserted, both in legislative sessions and in U.S. Congressional campaign debates as well as on his webpage [6], that there is a link between breast cancer and abortion.[7] On one occasion, when he said this on the state House floor, after which several lawmakers "walked out" on Sali in protest. Idaho House Minority Leader Wendy Jaquet, who is a breast cancer survivor, noted that such a link has yet to be proven and remarked that "If it's not a good study then we should not be using it."
....I think old Bill Sali (BS) may be the guy that came up with the bumper sticker "Welcome to
Idaho-Now Go Home"...he makes DeLay look like a
wuss! See what happens when GOP controls the
entire state? No dems to pick on, no dems to blame...they turn into cannibals. heh He's all
yours, Seth!

Arthur --

Haggard's private life is much too San Franciscanoid for him to lead the GOP, evangelist or not.

Crystal meth and male prostitutes are just a tad too far to the left for the average conservative, though they'd be in their own element on the left side of the aisle.

BB --

No, thanks, LOL. That particular Idahoan is one you guys can keep, preferably in one of those walled in "communities" where they spend the day weaving baskets.

Well it's just the consequence of the King David (President Bush) and Joab (Republican Congressional leaders) routine that's been going on for six years; the American people got fed up with the corruption and self-serving and decided to give the other party a chance.

Or to be less cryptic, George Bush left it up to Congress to carry his water, relying on the Congressional leaders to enforce party discipline to get his pet projects through. In turn, though, George had to roll over and throw away his veto pen against the pork and other spending excesses, enabling the leaders to travel down the hubris path and losing touch with the voters.

That, combined with George Bush's unwillingness to recognize that being President meant that he had to successfully sell the Iraq war to American voters, not just to his inner circle. I've seen this coming since before the Iraq war started; once he got his Congressional declaration, Mr. Bush didn't care enough to stop Saddam from spiriting out his WMD's to the Becca, even though WMD's was his major causus belli.

With George Bush spending his last two years focused on trying to secure a legacy in the eyes of history, the Republicans are on their own to regroup and find their purpose again. Or will they fragment into squabbling factions? Their first test will be the new leadership they decide upon.

Seth explained:

Crystal meth and male prostitutes are just a tad too far to the left for the average conservative, though they'd be in their own element on the left side of the aisle.

Au contraire.

Ted is one of yours.

Don't fret. He'll get into treatment and be cured of demon rum & homosexuality. The devil & the secular humanists made him do it don't you see.

Ted Haggard IS the GOP base. Hypocritical & deeply flawed.

Presidential timber in other words.

Seth, everyone who participates in a manure-throwing contest ends up stinking, regardless of who tossed the first turd.

Civil Truth --

I have said many times that the Bush we reelected in 2004 was not the Bush we elected in 2000.

I have not perceived the Executive Branch and the Republicans in the House and Senate as being totally on the same page for a long time -- had they been, and had they stuck to what we put them there for, they could have gotten a lot more done.

I don't know what happened to Dubya after Nov 2004, and I have been disappointed in our folks on the Hill since long before that -- they simply got too complacent. That is why I recently expressed my belief that there should be Congressional term limits.

This en masse loss we've experienced could actually be a blessing: Maybe next time around we'll have the opportunity to vote in some blood untainted by years in the DC machine, some folks who'll do what we elect them to do rather than whatever they feel like doing.

Having learned what I have about the intended North American Union, however, and knowing how the Democrats think, I am concerned that their majority in the House will facilitate plans for the NAU, so I'm completely in wait-and-see mode for the time being. I can well imagine our being inundated with socialism at the same time as the Bush plan enacts the NAU, making us a small but identical twin to the EU.

Arthur --

Homosexuals and druggies are exceptions to the rule where conservatives are concerned, while they are more mainstream on the left.

I guarantee that if you went down to a skid row area where a lot of drugs are used or went to a gay neighborhood and conducted a political poll, you would come out of it with more than 90% of your respondents identifying themselves as Democrats.

Civil Truth --

That is why it is very important to stick with the truth when one speaks disapprovingly of others.

Thus, there is no "mud" involved.

Seth explained:

Homosexuals and druggies are exceptions to the rule where conservatives are concerned, while they are more mainstream on the left.

And yet this pathology seems to succeed so well in the GOP.

Go figure.

Have a great night Seth.

I can tell this is wearing on you.

Arthur --

Au contraire (a little French -- spit! -- there).

Once in a blue moon, a so-called conservative gets caught out engaging in alternative passtimes, so to speak. So what?

When one Republican gets nailed doing something trillions of Democrats do and consider normal, the left automatically tries to paint the entire right as a hotbed of whatever it is, LOL.

You folks are one of my all time favorite sources of amusement. heh heh....

Seth,
Your observation
"a lot of drugs are used or went to a gay neighborhood and conducted a political poll, you would come out of it with more than 90% of your respondents identifying themselves as Democrats."
makes sense (as would a similar poll among faculty at major universities). I'm not really a political junkie, but am interested in the "why" of things. At
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=242
the PEW center offers very interesting stats on
the types and views of the entire spectrum. It is instructive to visit their various charts and helpful in explaining the mysterious shifting
"center"

Seth, this was not so much a vote for the democrats, but a vote against the republicans, because conservative issues won all across this great nation.

Hopefully, our Republican leaders have figured out that integrity DOES count, and elections are won because of honesty and tenacity.

10:09 AM

BB --

Thanks, excellent link!

It definitely shows me how far I've come from my pre-Carter liberal days; I seem to fall most comfortably under the heading of enterpriser, at least where most of my political beliefs are concerned.

In the case of my response to Arthur, I think the "why" has to do with enabling -- the Democrats are light on crime and pro-gay marriage, the Republicans are not. People affiliate themselves with that which supports their lifestyles, as often as not to the exclusion of other considerations.

A drug addict could care less about national security as long as he faces less or no jail time for getting caught in possession, and would actually prefer porous borders because that means the supply of his drugs will not become scarce and cause prices to go up.

A notably large segment of the gay community lives an entire parallel social and in many ways economic lifestyle, exactly like the straight community except with same sex couples. Since the left supports gay marriage, they support the left, and therefore go along with the rest of the left's agendas. Their concerns for all other issues parrot those of their political benefactors -- when I lived in SF, I got into more than a few political arguments with such folks, and it became immediately evident in nearly every case that the sum total of their "knowledge" on every issue other than GLBT rights was pure bumper sticker -- they actually recited slogans as a means of debate.

I also have to agree with PEW on their observation that liberals are not in tune with either the poor or with conservative Democrats -- they are out in left field someplace.

As I've said before, I was raised a conservative Democrat, and the values of CDs are a far cry from those of liberals. As far as the poor are concerned, liberals are mostly way out of touch. They use the poor as a means for getting votes, stroking them with entitlements rather than trying to help them become self sufficient.

One of the few pro-active policies I ever saw embraced by the SF city govt was one in which they decreased minority welfare somewhat by providing training for city jobs, like bus drivers, etc, getting welfare mothers into working situations wherein they could look after themselves and their families without having to depend on "the check".

This showed that a lot of those folks, listening to the nonstop racist BS of the left that they need govt handouts to survive until they believed it, would actually prefer to work and have self respect, and I have met a few of them, including a couple who have since gone from entry level jobs to more responsible, better paying positions(not that the entry level jobs were low paying, after all they were city jobs).

Alas, I have the feeling, though, that this election has signalled a change of course that we will not all like:

Not long ago, I posted about the Bush designs for a North American Union, and how he and his counterparts in Mexico and Canada were going around their respective legislative branches in laying their plans. Our Republican controlled Congress, while definitely lacking in results we conservatives elected them for, would never have stood by and watched US sovereignty being sold off by our own govt.

Our political left are great admirers of the EU and the UN, are for open borders and granting non-citizens the same rights the rest of us enjoy, and embrace the concept of socialism.

With a Democrat majority on the Hill, while engaging in the usual party rivalries, Bush and his cohorts in the NAU endeavor will now have a Congress they can work with sans the stealth bit -- I truly believe that the results of Tuesday's election have sealed our fate re a North American Union coming to fruition by its projected schedule of 2010.

Gawfer --

Agreed.

Personally, I would just as soon none of those who were unseated by Democrats ever get elected to those jobs again.

We need Americans who have been living and working outside the system, who can bring with them the will of the people, fresh in their minds. There need to be term limits, so that each person who serves in Congress can serve a term or two, then return to the private sector to reap what he's sown.

However, as I said in the last few paragraphs of my reply to BB's last comment, I believe Tuesday's election results have paved the way for an unprecedented change in this country that many, including millions of Democrats, will not like but will be unable to do anything about.

There will be a dramatic change in the GOP to conservative leadership, while the Dems push their liberal agenda because they believe they have a voter mandate for that agenda rather than this being a backlash on the GOP. The true face of liberalism will show over the next two years and there will be a GOP House, Senate and White House as a result with strong conservative leadership and agenda!

Seth,
"I seem to fall most comfortably under the heading of enterpriser," ..hey! we strongly agree on something!

Ken --

I believe it will begin when they raise taxes as their first priority and the economy begins to fall off, starting with employment figures.

Knowing the Democrats, they will try blaming it on some residual effect or other of Bush economic policies, which will leave it up to those Republicans still in Congress to do what they have neglected to do these last few years: Get up on their hind legs and defend the Administration's policies, and attach blame where it needs to be attached, squarely on the Democrats' tax increases.

I get the distinct feeling that, having seen the fates of so many of their colleagues a couple of days ago, that they will be a lot more conscientious toward that end, knowing now the relevance of November, 2008 on their own careers.

BB --

I take that not to mean that you, too, seem to fall most comfortably under the heading of enterpriser, LOL, but that we both strongly agree that I do.

Seth,
You are correct: am am to lazy to be LAISSEZ, although we are both FAIRE :)

BB --

In order to be a true "enterpriser", one must be *laissez fairer than most.

*French (spit!)

I posted this over at GM's but I thought you might enjoy my "Onion-like" news scoop.

As the giddy feeling of victory starts to fade, some Democratic leaders are now harboring suspicions of a deep Rovian plot behind the Republican defeat: by tricking them into taking control of the Congress, the Democrats have now been trapped into having to govern rather than being able to obstruct. As a result, Democratic party officials are considering whether to demand a recount in Virginia in the hope that Senator Allen will prevail.

Just kidding, I'm afraid. CNN reports that Senator Allen is set to concede, which will give control of the Senate to the Democrats (with the help of the two Independents).

Civil Truth --

LOLOL!!!!

The Dems have become so used to obstructing, criticizing and throwing rocks without contributing any alternative solutions that it's got to pose some sort of shock to contemplate that come January, they will be responsible for producing said solutions. For them, the party's over. Now they will have to lead, and they will have to justify all their criticism by showing us that they have a "better plan" for leading the country.

Shame on me, but I look forward to at least a couple of years of tragedy based amusement -- gotta find entertainment where you can, right?

Arthur --

Haggard's private life is much too San Franciscanoid for him to lead the GOP, evangelist or not.

Actually more Colorado Springs than San Francisco.

Arthur --

Ted (wow, with Teds it's either drowning their dates or doing male prostitutes and drugs!)
may have committed his transgressions in Colorado Springs, but they would have better fit in and more likely escaped notice had they been "performed" in San Francisco.

Or performed in Hollywood.

It's only for two years. The Donks are so hooked on discredited social and economic policies that they will self destruct within 6 months to a year.

I've indulged myself with some humor about the election, but sober analysis indicates that the Republicans will have an uphill battle to recapture either the House or the Senate in 2008 (and the 2010 Senate will also be difficult). They're going to have to work hard and not simply expect things to fall into their labs.

Two good sites are Election Projection (who very accurately predicted the election outcome) and Wizbang Politics.

The Democrats are not idiots; indeed they ran a technically superior campaign to the Republicans. Much depends on whether the Republicans learn the correct lessons from Tuesday's debacle.

Atheling2 --

LOL. Had they been performed in Hollywood, even right on the corner of Sunset and Highland, nobody would even have noticed.

Shoprat --

Any of the Dems' stated agendas will have fast, telling effects.

I see where Reid's promised to put Lieberman back in charge of the Senate's Homeland Security committee to stroke him for staying loyal to the Dems. They really want to keep that majority vote, good for them -- we can't let them take too long to "prove" themselves, can we?

Seth wrote:

Ted may have committed his transgressions in Colorado Springs, but they would have better fit in and more likely escaped notice had they been "performed" in San Francisco.

But. But. But. If only. If only. If only.

Only they didn't take place in Babylon by the bay Seth. Ted's transgressions took place in Colorado Springs. Ground zero to the American Christian evangelical movement. You're right that his episode would have garnered far less attention in SF. Californians lack that particular hypocrisy. But in Colorado Springs in the midst of all that morality (self-described) and godliness (ditto) banging a gay hooker (after preaching agin them sodomites over & again) while an acting minister & high on meth is a story.

And one sure to be repeated.

There's your base.

Seth,
"we can't let them take too long to "prove" themselves, can we?
A couple years seems fair, given that GOP congress had 12 and President had 6. BTW, thought
Allen's concession speech was excellent, he is
a class guy...

Earth calling Arthur and Seth: closer orbit please...

Civil Truth --

If all those lost seats didn't send them a definitive message, the problem goes a lot deeper than we'd thought. :-)

Thanks for the two links, I hadn't been to either site. I have read a little at each, and have shortcutted both of them to read farther.

Arthur --

The fact remains, it was an isolated incident. As usual, the libs will try to say that Ted's behavior was representative of all conservatives.

That's pretty dumb.

BB --

The policies the Dems say they will enact will have a more immediate effect than you might expect.

Businesses and markets will react quickly to higher taxes, terrorists in Iraq will move fast to exploit any US troop withdrawals, etc.

Seth wrote:

Arthur --

The fact remains, it was an isolated incident.

Gary Hart's transgression was an isolated incident.

I don't recall you guys being entirely sympathetic at that time. But the juicy bit abou the appalling Ted Haggard is his religious (!!???) bona fides having been long in order and his weekly chats with the White House.

isolated?

Don't think so.

Seth added:

As usual, the libs will try to say that Ted's behavior was representative of all conservatives.

Tarring others with the same brush seems a long time GOP pastime.

No fun when it swings your way is it?

Too bad.

Civil Truth --

Sorry, I have a nasty habit of responding to idiotic comments when I should know better.

Arthur --

Like most liberal trolls, you make a habit of picking out one little item that's completely off topic in a thread and turning it into a new topic, such as this assinine debate you have somehow managed to get me to pursue with you.

Personally, I'm done with it, and will not respond to anything else you comment on that subject.

LOL .. as is typical of trolls, they try to twist the topic into something totally unrelated. This statement you made "We move ahead and hope the Democrats don't do too much damage while they rule the roost" is key. A lot of work has to be done between now and then. I've also been reading that Pelosi is going to try and ram that other scam, global warming, down your guys throats. It's not only a socialist scam to pick your pocket, but a deflection so they can push through other agendas while your looking in a different direction. I'll be watching...... lets hope the veto pen has lots of ink, as the dems sure had nothing to offer, and they'll be shooting from the hip.

ABF --

I anticipate a lot of problems in that regard.

If Pelosi and crew lock us into a Kyoto agenda, it could ultimately cost a few million jobs -- coupled with the demise of the Bush tax cuts, that will be a certainty. And remember, the sunset clause deadline on the tax cuts is upon us.

Now factor in the blessings they'll bestow upon illegal aliens and the encouragement that will provide for still more millions of Mexicans to sneak into the U.S.

The combination of all the above couldn't possibly see its way to a conclusion any sensible person would want to contemplate.

ABF wrote:

LOL .. as is typical of trolls, they try to twist the topic into something totally unrelated.

Nonsense. The staggering hypocrisy of the GOP, in this instance illustrated by Ted Haggard, is exactly thhe point.

Here's my current (and most costly) favorite.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/28/politics/main646142.shtml

Nation Building and the War in Iraq

During the 2000 campaign, George W. Bush argued against nation building and foreign military entanglements. In the second presidential debate, he said: "I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say, 'This is the way it's got to be.'"

The United States is currently involved in nation building in Iraq on a scale unseen since the years immediately following World War II.

During the 2000 election, Mr. Bush called for U.S. troops to be withdrawn from the NATO peacekeeping mission in the Balkans. His administration now cites such missions as an example of how America must "stay the course."

The examples are endless. Find your own. It's fun.

Far from twisting the topic into something it isn't, my job is to keep the topic where it belongs when you folks try and avoid painful truths.

Have a great weekend.

Arthur --

"Nation building" to lefties takes on a meaning all its own.

The so-called "nation building" we did after WW2 was, I thought, a mutually agreeable alternative to leaving our former enemies' countries in smoking ruins and/or shattered economies. Most victorious countries won't even consider this course -- they will either permanently colonize or leave said vanquished enemies to fester in total ruin. Instead, the US worked out-of-pocket to get these countries back on their feet.

If the other alternative would have been more to a liberal's liking, well, that doesn't speak very highly of liberals, does it?

The Balkans enterprise, a Clinton involvement, was initiated by Euro countries whose main motivation was to use the tragic events therein as an opportunity to extend their influence in to the Balkans. Clinton, like all liberals a suck-up to the EU and the UN, allowed himself to get us sucked into that affair as well.

We took the side of al-Qaeda and other Islamists over there, ignoring Muslim aggression against Christian Serbs and others -- ever since, the only "ethnic cleansing" over there seems to have been Muslims butchering non-Muslims, which neither the EU nor the UN seems to give a tinker's damn about, but let's not talk about that, since liberals have proven themselves to be both anti-Christian and pro-Islam.

As for your accusations of "nation building" in Iraq and the already played out, trivial debate on the Haggard affair, I have spent more than enough blogging time/bandwidth expounding upon our reasons for remaining in Iraq, and have already made plain that I will waste no further time on the latter debate. I try, though not always successfully, to avoid "flogging a dead horse".

Should the Democrats manage to enact a cut-and-run strategy for Iraq, the Iraqis will pay a terrible price in the short term (I know the bloodbath that followed our exit from Vietnam did nothing to detract from the left's victory celebrations back then, so why should a similar bloodbath in Iraq be any different?), and the west will pay a terrible price in the slightly longer term. Of course, the Democrats will blame the results of their actions on Bush, as you folks have a definite aversion to taking responsibility for your own mistakes/ actions.

...my job is to keep the topic where it belongs when you folks try and avoid painful truths.

-- I thoroughly checked my blog's payroll records, and found that there are none. I'm the only person that works here, and I don't even pay myself for it. :-)

...my job is to keep the topic where it belongs when you folks try and avoid painful truths.

-- I thoroughly checked my blog's payroll records, and found that there are none. I'm the only person that works here, and I don't even pay myself for it. :-)

It's a labor of love on my part Seth.

Have a great weekend.

Arthur, give it a rest. You're becoming boring.

Excellent post, Seth. And I like your upbeat attitude. Your analysis is right on target as well; the GOP did lose sight of why we put them there in the first place. Like Ab, I hope that veto pen holds lots of ink and that Bush can remember how to use it!

Gayle --

This is one thing about our style of government that has always proven true: Even though the voting public makes the occasional collective error, as often as not for good reasons, go figure, they have a way of unerringly correcting those mistakes in later elections.

Firing the GOP majority and hiring the Democrats was an error of large proportions, but there was justification via the quality of the product the Republican majority was delivering. They weren't, as Gawfer pointed out in his comment, so much hiring the Dems as firing the Republicans.

This decision will cause some damage to the country, no doubt about it, because the Democrats are no longer the Democrats who once loved America as we do and respected our nation's founding principles and laws as we do -- they are now controlled by liberals who are more dedicated to socialism and self destruction than to any patriotic ideals.

This upsets our previous perfect political balance, but...

... the voters, a couple or more million lost jobs and a few terrorist attacks later, will realize the mistake they've made and restore the GOP to a majority -- perhaps this time, however, the Republican senators and representatives, having been chastised and reminded that they are not infallible, will approach their positions with more humility and dedication to the wishes of their constituents and less complacency and egocentrism.

I think you're right about the self-correcting nature of our governing system with regards to domestic policies.

However, I don't see any self-correcting process for foreign policy errors, since other countries and peoples are not part of our electoral system. If turning over Congress to the Democrats leads to serious errors in our foreign policy, 2008 may be too late to correct them. However, the die is cast and we'll have to live with the number that comes up. The next few weeks in the Middle East could be critical.

Civil Truth --

...other countries and peoples are not part of our electoral system...

That's definitely a problem we're about to face -- the Democrats will kowtow to UN agendas which favor Islamofascism more than they do democracy, which will in turn place our allies in the War On Terror in awkward positions -- Australia, Poland and even Denmark have commented on this in a roundabout way, obviously awaiting statements from our incoming congressional leadership.

Since the U.S. is the prime mover, a policy reversal will throw our entire strategy into limbo as regards those countries who have been working with us and we will undoubtedly lose credibility with them.

For those countries, it will be like an earnest boyfriend who has made indelible committments with a fickle girlfriend (and vice versa) and been left standing there in the rain on prom night.

Regaining their confidence after fixing our own government will be like trying to sell a vaccuum cleaner to Robinson Crusoe.

But what can we do, had G-d wanted our lives to be easy, He would have sent all the liberals to live with Job. :-)

civil truth wrote:

However, I don't see any self-correcting process for foreign policy errors, since other countries and peoples are not part of our electoral system.

Indeed not. But defeating terrorists calls for a multilateral approach. Allies are important in this ongoing, lengthy battle. International cooperation will win the day. Unilateral excursions such as Iraq are counterproductive and a waste of time, lives and money. The dissolution of Iraq has provided an opportunity for Al Qaeda to strengthen itself in point of fact.

Nope. Diplomacy with our allies (even the French Seth, who play real hardball with Islamists in their country) will be required to end this thing.

And Gayle, always a pleasure to read your comments.

Arthur --

...even the French Seth, who play real hardball with Islamists in their country

What hardball? They lick the Islamofascists' anuses!

The French (spit!)

Seth-

What hardball? They lick the Islamofascists' anuses!

The French (spit!)

Sigh. Speak French Seth?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5078812.stm

The French are active in engaging & neutralizing Islamist threats both to their own nation and to their neighbors. Here is but one example.

Arthur --

When colleagues of mine in Paris tell me they have been authorized to go all out, I will acknowledge that the French (spit!) are doing what needs to be done.

At the moment, they are addressing problems with the Chechens, not the Arabs, who pose the worst problems.

One of my colleagues who works for the French govt tells me they are still in the cosmetic stage.

Seth,
This thing with the French (spit!)...that start with Clovis I, Charlemagne, Louis the Bald, Phillip the Fair, Voltaire the Noisy, LaFayette,
Petain, DeGaulle, Bardot? If we gotta be spitting, I need to know where to start. :)

BB --

The French (spit!) seem to have changed drastically over the centuries -- they went from a great world colonial power to the ungrateful, self centered, soulless, socialist, whoring pitiful remains they are today. Now, please don't think I'm in any way, shape or form biased against the French (spit!) -- my own opinion of them stems mostly from what they have been in my lifetime.

For more information on the French (spit!), go to Google:

Type "French military victories" into the search bar, then click on "I feel Lucky". :-)

Seth,
Ok, but should I affix my napkin PRIOR to ordering French (spit!)toast? :)

BB --

You mean, Freedom Toast, like Freedom Fries? :-)

Seth,
Correction noted. Freedom Foreign Legion..freedom horn..freedom braid. I think I
got it. Appreciate your frankness (spit?)..
Somebody notify Google-they have 83,000 sites
for France(spit!)Nuyen, actress. You 'enterprisers' sure can confuse us mountain
hicks (ptooie!) :)

BB --

I actually thought "freedom horn" when I posted that comment, LOL. I was listening to the Brandenburg Concertos, so instruments were up front in my mind.

Ah, the Legion Etrangier (French, spit!) I must admit that the F.L. paratroopers are a pretty tough bunch of folks, easily on a par with the SAS or the SEALS, but they don't reflect the rest of their countrymen -- also, the legion isn't restricted to Frenchmen (spit!)

Freedom braid, LOL!

BB --

The French (spit!) seem to have changed drastically over the centuries -- they went from a great world colonial power to the ungrateful, self centered, soulless, socialist, whoring pitiful remains they are today. Now, please don't think I'm in any way, shape or form biased against the French (spit!) -- my own opinion of them stems mostly from what they have been in my lifetime.

How long did you live in France Seth?

Arthur --

I never would, I wouldn't even waste the time and money visiting that socialist shithole.

When I read about their "contributions" at the U.N. (double spit!) and read news from there, as well as security reports concerning France, and see how they show their gratitude to those that help them, my stomach turns.

I do, however, know several French (spit!) people. One is a good friend who feels the way I do about his own countrymen. Of course, he's Jewish like me and the French (spit!) are mostly antisemitic on top of all else. I've also come into contact with quite a few French (spit) tourists these last few years, and networked with a few French colleagues.