Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Today and tomorrow

I know that all our readers are going to vote or have already voted. And I doubt that there are any fence-sitters in the NLT precincts.

I’ll be up late tonight, though without any expectation of knowing the final shape of Congress, unless it’s a total blowout. You see,those darn absentee ballots (200,000 in Maryland alone) are going to take forever to count, and they’ll make a difference in what I expect (or is it hope?) will be close races.

If the Democrats retake one or both chambers, Michael Kinsley hopes they don’t stick to this document. Here’s what he has to say:

"New Direction" quite rightly denounces the staggering fiscal irresponsibility of Republican leaders and duly promises "Pay As You Go" spending. But in the entire document there is not one explicit revenue-raiser to balance the many specific and enormous new spending programs and tax credits.

***

For national security in general, the Democrats’ plan is so according-to-type that you cringe with embarrassment: It’s mostly about new cash benefits for veterans. Regarding Iraq specifically, the Democrats’ plan has two parts. First, they want Iraqis to take on "primary responsibility for securing and governing their country." Then they want "responsible redeployment" (great euphemism) of American forces.


Older readers may recognize this formula. It’s Vietnamization -- the Nixon-Kissinger plan for extracting us from a previous mistake. But Vietnamization was not a plan for victory. It was a plan for what was called "peace with honor" and is now known as "defeat."

I hope we don’t have to share Kinsley’s hope.

Update: John Fund has a useful election watcher’s guide.

Update #2: If (or should I say when?) there’s litigation, this site will be indispensable.

Discussions - 2 Comments

I did all I can do -- I voted for John Kyl and Republican challenger Ron Drake in Arizona’s 7th district. I did this via an early ballot.

That said, if the Republicans lose control of one or both houses, they have few to blame but themselves. They became a party without a real message; an incoherent mix of personal ambition and localized selfishness.

I recall vividly the arrogant boasting of conservatives after the 2004 elections. I also recall thinking, "You best not get too confident. The margin of victory was pretty thin. But of course too many people got too intoxicated on the notion of a "permanent majority." What a foolish thing to believe.

I hope the Republicans retain both houses. But I have my fears they will not. And even if they do, the Democrats will simply re-tool and gun for 2008. Only a decisive victory in 2006 will cause the Democrats to "implode." We aren’t going see such a decisive victory.

The Democrats tap into the selfish interests of America. That’s a winning strategy -- eventually -- unless a higher self-interest presents itself. Since 2001 that higher self-interest was national security. But Americans have forgotten that; they’ve gone back asleep. And in their slumber they slide back to "What’s best for me.

The Strata-Sphere has a very useful list of House seats said to be most in play. One can go down the list, click on the underlined seat and see what RCP has to say about the race. I looked to how previous races had gone and how GWB had done there in ’04 and came up with my own conclusions. Some of those folks won last time by over 30% and they’re in danger this time? Hmph.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/9332