ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Two core Democrat constituencies, mass media scrouges of the Bush administration and Leftist activists, are handing the 2006 elections to the Republicans.
For those who expected or feared the 2006 state and Congressional elections to be nationalized on the issue of widespread Iraq war-weariness, instead the nationalized issue is becoming the undermining of domestic security by the bridge-too-far route taken by the mass media allied with the New York Times and its netroots shock-troops (shock, in this case, being how outrageous can their conspiracy theories get).
Compared to the complexities and frustrations of military action in an alien culture halfway around the globe, on the issue of domestic security there is not widespread weariness nor confusion. The common American expectation is of safety at home, in one’s everyday peaceful pursuits, in the freedom to congregate or travel without fear, and that criminals – especially foreign-allied terrorists – should be vigorously stopped.
Always astute and succinct Robert Caldwell today summarizes the survey data about how this is “A political battle Bush is winning.”
The Lieberman-Lamont Democrat primary battle in one of our most liberal states, party primaries being where the effect of activists are most felt, is still expected to result in a Lieberman victory. If by some chance not, surveys of Lieberman’s standing as an independent in the general election show him overwhelmingly winning.
The minority standing of those Democrats most opposed to the U.S. engagement in Iraq, evident even in Connecticut, mirrors their national weightlessness. The latest Gallup poll shows even less (19%) understanding the Democrat’s position on Iraq than understanding the Bush administrations’ (25%). More telling is that 31% favor “gradual withdrawal”, 30% favor “stay the course” policies, and another 7% various consultative steps, which are closer to the three-fold tack the Bush administration is taking than to the “immediate withdrawal” course most identified with leading Democrats and favored by 47% of Democrats.
Unlike 1952, the Democrats have no one with a fraction of the credibility of an Eisenhower, or even 1968’s Nixon, to amorphously pledge to solve the war. The Democrats’ harping on “Bush lied” about WMD’s in 2003 is even unraveling as more Iraqi documents dribble out revealing substantial real threats and potential. (See Ed Morrisey’s stream of posts at CaptainsQuarters blog as a handy way to keep up.)
The bold and baldly false assertions by NYT’s executive editor Bill Keller that his decision to expose operational intelligence techniques via SWIFT was relatively harmless, even salutary, is belied by the stirring of opposition and undermining occurring among European participants, as seen here in the NYT’s itself. Such affirmations of solidarity as Slate media commentator Jack Schafer’s “Bush wants us to trust him. I’d rather trust Bill Keller,” ring absurdly to all but that narrow band of NYT’s allied Bush haters who are self-blinded from reality.
Of course, there’s much time between now and November for surprises, and no one should underestimate the ability of Republican politicians to shoot their own feet. However, there’s little reason to believe that Bush’s natural calmness and decency along with continued alternative and mainstream conservative media penetration of Leftist twaddle won’t be seen on balance as more assuring of overriding self-interests in domestic safety by the decisive margin in 2006, at least to the marginal extent that nationalized issues affect votes.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Re: NYTâ€™s Media Menagerie & Netroots Hand Republicans 2006
I brought this up during the Kerry/Bush election. Instead of crying all the time about republican misdeeds. The democrats need to slam the airwaves left and right convincing America that they can be tough on budget control (Clinton was) and tough on military protection.
The public is engraved with the notion that you vote democrat for domestic issues and republican for world safety. Bush has destroyed the republicans claim to budget control and his hurt hi party's standing on protecting the country.
I knew he was lying...I knew what he was up to...but many americans don't feel that way. The time has never been better for the democrats to seize the moment and speak in honest and practical terms about protecting the country.
They will lose some donations from some on the left but they may pick up moderates money (like me) in the process to offset the loss. I'm still waiting...i don't hear it. Hillary won't convince anyone of this...it will take a tough no-nonse democrat who won't get into the nit-picking election diatribe to do it...until they do...every election except in favorable liberal states will be close or lost to the G.O.P. because of security.