A Democrat Mistake Is A GOP Gain

I know that Thomas ranted a bit today regarding the problems the GOP base is facing this year. A lacking spine is among the gripes, as well as the immigration fiasco from earlier this week. However, for all the problems our party has, the Democrats have more. They have candidates coming up for the mid-terms that stand by two solid platform ideas, and these ideas are going to get them crushed at the ballot box. They are:

--End the war in Iraq and bring the troops home.

--Impeach the president.

Now impeachment talk has died down a bit, and it is likely due to the fact that the country dislikes such talk. That is as evident now as it was with President Clinton, and the GOP then playing "gotcha" politics. As we have extolled here, it was wrong and foolish for the GOP to press forward with that move against President Clinton. While impeachment in the House was almost certain, and did come to pass, the Senate refused to remove him. A wasted effort, indeed, as the GOP was unable to rid the Oval Office of the liar to begin with. And I am sure the GOP base breathed a collective sigh of relief when removal did not occur. Can anyone imagine was sort of fubar presidency Gore would have brought with him?

The "bring the troops home" rhgetoric is liable to kill the Democrats this year if it continues. Indeed, Hugh Hewitt points out the following statement made by Kweisi Mfume in the WaPo:

Kweisi Mfume has said Congress must force the president's hand through the appropriations process and establish a plan for withdrawal. "If we can set a date certain for an Iraqi constitution and a date certain for establishment of an Iraqi government, which we did, I think we ought to be able to set a date certain for withdrawal" in concert with increased international participation, he said.

The Democrats do not understand that in making such a promise and making it public, the attacks on our troops and Iraqi forces will dwindle. The enemy will go into hiding and bide their time until we leave. And when we do, it will be a replay of Saigon all over again. This cannot be allowed to happen. The terrorists in Iraq will almost certainly gain even more help from Iran and Syria in bringing down the new government there. And the blame will lie at our feet for being so bold and impetuous as to adhere to such a foolish call for withdrawal. The WaPo puts it succinctly for everyone:

"[W]herever Democratic loyalists gather, there are five words sure to prompt applause for a Senate candidate:

End the war in Iraq."

If it is true that this is to be their platform for 2006, it is a grave miscalculation on their part, and it is likely to be the battle cry that fuels the GOP base out to the polls in November. The people of this nation do not like it when the military is played with. Games are not on the agenda of the military, but defending the nation is. That is what they are doing right now in Iraq.

The war in Vietnam turned unpopular thanks to the efforts of the antiwar, fringe Left. They turned the nation against the war, demoralized it and the troops, and withdrew from Vietnam which allowed the Communists to sweep in, and remove what was left of the government there. Thus far, the Left has tried to do the same this time around. The difference is that the people of the nation are not getting the news from just the MSM, like they did in Vietnam. There are bloggers--mil-bloggers and regular bloggers alike--that are passing on the good news out of Iraq and Afghanistan. These same people are appearing on TV, and printing columns in newspapers, and in essence combatting the lies of the MSM, and the antiwar movement.

And Hugh is correct. This is a fight for the GOP this year, and it must be met head-on. The GOP cannot shrink away from the arguments that we did what we had to do. That goes for Afghanistan and Iraq. We had to remove Saddam. Both nations are better off without their despotic rulers in place. And the US is safer because of it. But there are a few among the GOP that still seem to think they know better than the White House and the Pentagon. Among them are people like John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Arlen Specter is threatening to hold up NSA funds until he is satisfied that they can tie the president's hands regarding his terrorist surveillance program. Olympia Snowe and Mike DeWine have also jumped on that bandwagon, and speaking of DeWine, he nearly blew his foot off with this statement:

"Rumsfeld has made some very serious mistakes," DeWine declared, repeating his verdict for emphasis. "Very serious mistakes. I think history will judge him very harshly."

Personally speaking, and I know that Thomas believes this as well, Mike DeWine is becoming part of the problem in the Senate. Maybe he longs for the fawning press coverage that John McCain gets, or wishes the headlines that Arlen Specter makes. Regardless of the "why," he is becoming a problem. Hugh supports his reelection. We, on the other hand, do not. We would prefer that a solid conservative beat him in the primary; one that can defeat a Democrat challenger. If that is not possible, only then will we give grudging support of Mike DeWine. And this is not the only reason we dislike him. We look at his inclusion with the Gang of 14 as unforgivable; it directly violates their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution. That deal was an end-run around the powers of the president and the Senate when it comes to judicial nominees.

This is a major problem that the GOP seems to be overlooking. The president is the commander-in-chief during a time of war, and we are at war. The buck stops with him. Not with McCain, Graham, Specter, DeWine, Snowe, Hagel, or any other wobbly GOP representative that thinks they know better. Instead of butting heads with the administration, they need to show their support for it, and the agenda of the president. If they do not, then I see no reason to support them, and would encourage others in the GOP base to find a more suitable candidate to replace those up for reelection.

The Bunny ;)