Hillary Clinton

You know, I really thought the Left would be more subtle about their aspirations for Iraq--namely, that America is out win or lose, by the election, so they don't have to make any grown-up decisions. They reveal their infantilism if they say this straight out, so I thought, so I figured they would be subtle and deceptive thus the non-binding resolutions.

I was wrong.

Today, Hillary Clinton just plain said what the Democrats want--to run the Presidency, but more importantly to run their candidacy without having to deal with Iraq. (Of course, no matter the outcome in Iraq, future Presidents will have to deal with Iraq and all of the Middle East. A Democrat in the White House won't magic it away, no matter how much they wish it.) She says:

"I am going to level with you, the president has said this is going to be left to his successor," Clinton said. "I think it is the height of irresponsibility and I really resent it."

Bush describes Iraq as the central front in the global fight against terrorism that began after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "The war on terror will be a problem for the next president. Presidents after me will be confronting ... an enemy that would like to strike the United States again," he recently told USA Today.

I don't know why these people still shock me, but they do. And some think Hillary will be the New Iron Lady? And some think the only way Democrats will take Terrorism seriously will be to control the Presidency and Congress?

Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. If the Democrats have proven anything, it's that they simply won't be serious about any real threat America and the world faces. They aren't based in reality and can't be bothered with the truth.

Giuliani: A Moderate to Love?

I have written here before, that as a conservative I would vote for Giuliani. Why? It's simple really: because he's a leader. A secondary reason is that he can handle the press.

Captain Ed says:

I've often thought that conservatives have been too quick to dismiss Giuliani. Among the front-runners for the GOP nomination, he has the most consistent public record of accomplishment. He fought the Mob and won, crippling their once-unlimited power in the Big Apple, at no small personal risk to himself and his family. Giuliani also took on the task of running NYC when it appeared hopelessly lost to decay and a generation of liberal policies that had allowed the streets to fall under the sway of gangsters petty and grand. He also proved that welfare-to-work policies could succeed before Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress bolstered his efforts at the federal level.

Given his history of turnaround in New York, his executive experience outweighs anything offered by Mitt Romney and especially John McCain. Whatever his positions, he has proven himself more consistent in them than both men, although in Romney's case, his vacillations seem a little oversold. Romney has proven his leadership skills in the Olympics and in one term as Governor of Massachussetts, but Giuliani is a man who governed eight million people for two terms and helped rescue the city when hit by the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor.

That itsn't to say that his positions aren't problematic. He has been consistently pro-choice, and like many prosecutors, supports gun-control legislation. Those positions rightly make conservatives worry about what a President Giuliani would do once in office. However, he has also consistently spoken against judicial activism, and as a former federal prosecutor, knows first-hand the damage it does. Giuliani has promised to appoint judicial constructionists to the federal bench, the kind not likely to impose abortion or gun policy from their unchecked positions.

Conservatives should reconsider Giuliani. Of all the candidates in the race thus far, he has the best track record of implementing conservative governance consistently and successfully. Read the rest of the article for an in-depth history of Rudy's tenure as mayor. (via Power Line)

As for abortion, if he made promised not to give any tax dollars to support the abortion ideals fine. It's a personal opinion. Ditto, gun control. I'd also like to hear how he feels about illegal immigration.

I, too, think that Giuliani has a shot and should be considered.

Mitt Romney on Glenn and Helen--UPDATE

Update: Why was Romney talking to Glenn & Helen to begin with? Betsy has the answer here.

Here's what she says of the "New Media" way of dealing with this political flare-up:
It's up to you whether or not you think that Romney has indeed changed his view or if he's just a political opportunist. You can decide of it even matters what his views on these subjects are. What I think is neat is how both the pro and anti-Romney folks were able to conduct this debate on the Internet within one day's news cycle.

The old-time media was reduced to covering the new media the next day. For example, the Boston Globe is basically reduced to giving the transcripts of the two videos.

This is how politics is going to be conducted from now on and any campaign that isn't ready to jump on these new media techniques and use them will be left in the cold. Or at least that is true as long as sites like YouTube can stay working!

This puts in mind a question Ann Althouse asked yesterday about the influence of the blogosphere on the '08 Presidential election. My answer was essentially "not much". Perhaps I was being too pessimistic. Another blogger noted that it will matter more in the Primaries, Romney said this himself, but in the general election Walter Cronkite rules. I cannot tell you how much that dismays me. Unless Walter and his cronies are caught in a bold-faced lie by the New Media, the New Media doesn't matter much. Mostly, we preach to the converted.

Update II: Ace says "meh". I agree with him on this:

The governing class, no matter what their stated politics, comes out of the same coastal monied class that all good liberal twacks do. That rubs off some.

Voters want their leaders to strongly embrace their particular values, and care about them strongly, but each voter has a different set of priorities he needs his leader to unswervingly support. Meaning that we have politicians who are supposed to care about everything passionately.

We have a word for people who care about everything passionately. We call them "maniacs."

I know this is going to sound crazy to some, but abortion is NOT a deciding issue for me. That's why I can vote for a Guiliani. Will he walk the line? Will he pop this bloated pig of a government? That's what I care about. Ultimately each person will have to answer for a decision like abortion. Ideological purists should find a campus from which to teach and speak, or a church from which to preach. Same thing.

**********************

Whilst I put my Amazon Store together (please take a look and comment below), I listened to Glenn and Helen talk to Mitt Romney. I must admit I was totally impressed. Different readers have told me that he's right on the issues and a good leader, but he's not on the national scene and I don't watch TV anyway so I hadn't seen or heard him, well ever.

He seemed concerned about all the things I'm concerned about: War on Terror (he already is forming a plan), Research and Development (what makes America great), Medical research (he articulated his position perfectly--he's for stem cell research, but doesn't want to to "create embryos to kill them"), Gay Marriage (he's against it, but he's for all people being respected and loves gay people and has them working for him--GOOD!!).

Here's my absolute favorite thing he said, "People worry about Universal Health Care. We already have Universal Health Care. Right now there are people who have insurance and then there is everyone else who go to the Emergency Room and get care which is paid for by those who have insurance." (This is a rough translation.) He is absolutely right. Today you and I pay for the illegal immigrants and those who don't have health care. In fact, if I wasn't worried about my credit rating going through the dumper, I'd just say "Forget it, let someone else pay."

Anyway, listen to the whole thing. It's a thoughtful interview and you learn a lot more about this guy. I think he articulates the Conservative message well. In fact, he seemed to me, to most represent a moderately American point of view. I give him huge bonus points for living and working in a nearly socialist state. He must work and play well with others. Of course, so did Bush in Texas, but this being Texas, even the Democrats are more conservative. More than that, Washington D.C. is a pit of poisonous vipers and the most amenable person can be painted extreme.

That last part leads to the following question: Who, in their right mind, would WANT to become President? That's the first question he answers.

The Mid-Term Election That Changed Nothing

Ann Althouse notes the sweeping changes, post-Democrat election:

So it's up to the Republicans to do something about the war? Nothing the Democrats can do at all. It's the same situation as before the election, and yet -- in Pelosi's words -- "this is new."

I'm picturing no change in funding the war, even if Bush goes through with his surge. We'll have some hearings and investigations, but they will be primarily for the purpose of shaping the Democrats image in preparation for the '08 election. And that's what you got out of the big '06 elections on the issue that the elections were supposedly all about.

This was my prediction not too far back:

We currently have a Congress who will probably come up with legislation that angers everyone--if they're capable of coming up with any at all. Negotiating compromise in this Congress will be like walking through chest-high glue. I don't expect much progress.

Oh Mama, I Love Obama

Betsy talks about the crush everyone has on Barack (Hussein) Obama here and here. I get it, he appeals to everyone mostly because no one knows anything about him. He's the cute new kid: girls dig him, guys want to be him. Betsy says:

Great, voters like the candidate they know the least about. Once they find out more about a candidate, he starts looking like all the other politicians we've learned to dislike. This goes with George Will's recommendation that Obama run now before people get used to him and are no longer infatuated.

Of course, that would mean that the media would have to actually examine Obama's positions and past votes instead of just writing articles about how popular he is. Can they keep up just writing worshipful articles without any real substance for almost two years? Sure, they can. But, history shows that the media eventually gets over their infatuation and then starts turning on the object of their affections. Will Obama's race, go looks and soothing bromides be enough to keep the media and electorate in a full swoon through November, 2008?

I don't know, Betsy, the media has yet to lose their lust for Hillary and it's been years of her manipulating and toying with them like a hungry cat who owns a pet mouse that will eventually be dinner. They don't mind being eaten--as long as it's by her. Wow, that sounds really bad. Actually, it's kind of apt. I've lost count of how many simultaneous O's the press and Hillary have had. You'd think they would all get exhausted. Gotta give 'em all credit for stamina.

The only problem for Obama is that eventually the press will divide their sweet ministrations. Obama and Hillary will duke it out for love and adulation. The press will either internally combust by denying the laws of physics and trying to get two stars to occupy the same space or they will choose one super, duper star.

Who will it be? Oh, who will it be? It's all so exciting!!!! I feel like I'm voting for Prom Queen, I mean King. I mean non-gender-specific really great human. The Anchoress thinks it will go like this:

And to those of you who say “she can’t win…”

Of COURSE she can win. She always could win. She wouldn’t be in the race if she didn’t know she can (or perhaps will) win.

We will now be treated to two years of a besotted press doing nothing but covering for her while demonizing the real or perceived “anti-Clintites” and tossing her softballs, spiking the stories that might hurt her, playing up what helps. You know, exactly the opposite of how they treat Bush!

Honestly. I am surprised that anyone is surprised. And yes, yes, yes…she can win. Note all the Dems who have already decided they won’t be running…and it’s not even horse-heads-in-beds season, yet.

And don’t say “Barack Obama” to me. He’ll be allowed to be her veep.

I tend to agree with her. From a tactical perspective, I think Obama might be pulling a Dean and end up peaking too soon. The perfect Veep.

Hillary is Running

If you want to know what I think of Hillary Clinton, read the Anchoress. I'm already tired of the woman and the campaign season hasn't started--in earnest. The Anchoress writes more charitably than I'm capable of when it comes to any Clinton. She says:

Of COURSE she can win. She always could win. She wouldn’t be in the race if she didn’t know she can (or perhaps will) win.

We will now be treated to two years of a besotted press doing nothing but covering for her while demonizing the real or perceived “anti-Clintites” and tossing her softballs, spiking the stories that might hurt her, playing up what helps. You know, exactly the opposite of how they treat Bush!

Honestly. I am surprised that anyone is surprised. And yes, yes, yes…she can win. Note all the Dems who have already decided they won’t be running…and it’s not even horse-heads-in-beds season, yet.

And don’t say “Barack Obama” to me. He’ll be allowed to be her veep.

Yep. That's the way it WILL be, so sayeth they all. And if you're a Battle Star Galactica fan, you know what I mean. This Hillary thing is a religious experience for those on the Left.

Fix Voter Fraud NOW!

Gina Cobb explains why you need to call your Senator and get this law passed today. After reading her post, I really wonder who it is, actually, that is stealing elections.

Abortion Politics Republican Style

Right after the election I wrote this in my post titled "The Average American":

Abortion: While many people are against abortion in principle, they are for it in reality. Too many women have had abortions and defend their choice. Too many men wanted a woman to have and abortion and she did, or wished she'd had one and she didn't. Either way, abortion will never be illegal nation-wide in America ever again. Even if the SCOTUS turns over Roe, it will go to the states and the states will vote and support it.

I still believe this a few days and some sleep later. Abortion cannot be the foundation of the Republican party--at least not framed that way. The theme must be bigger: "A culture of life where every individual, even the weakest have value." But even still, too many people have had abortions and that changes the electorates view of Republicans if that is the "litmus test". Hearts and minds must be won to choosing life and that is the role of the Church not a political party.

Remember the Anchoress' spanking? Yes, well, in that post she linked to a fantastic editorial at The New York Sun written by Alicia Colon. You absolutely MUST read it all. She says this:

If President Clinton had done everything Mr. Bush has done since he's been in office, he would be hailed as a hero and given credit for the booming economy, the low unemployment, and overseeing our nation's security and the liberation of two countries. But Mr. Bush is an evangelical Christian, and while this is the greatest country in the world and we are a good people, I very much doubt that we have a moral majority.

Would a moral country have reelected so many times Senator Kennedy, who left Mary Jo Kopechne to drown in Chappaquiddick while he sought a cover story before reporting the accident? I don't think so. A former Klansman, Senator Byrd, was just re-elected in West Virginia and is free to use the "n" word on network television because he puts the word "white" in front of it. Look at our culture, which revels in the profane and the licentious, and then you'll understand why a political party that adopts an overtly religious façade will be targeted so viciously by the hedonists who rule our society.

I very much doubt we have a "moral majority", either. The moral way is not the easy way and when push comes to shove, don't most of us want and take the easy way? She continues:

I happen to hold the same values as our president, but perhaps I am a little more cynical in that I don't believe many of those on the religious right should have had so much influence on the political scene. As much as I am anti-abortion, I also realize that many Americans do not have the strength of character to recognize the humanity of the unborn when it is inconvenient. Demanding litmus tests of potential candidates is self-defeating, and may explain why Republicans come up with so many weak performers on the campaign trail. This is not to suggest that the GOP recruit more moderates. The fact is that Republican moderates are simply liberal Democrats who don't want their taxes raised.

I'm saying that until we work at changing the hearts and minds of people by helping the women in crisis pregnancies ourselves, expending so much energy on effecting legislative change is a waste of valuable time. The most dangerous place for a child in America is indeed in its mother's womb, but most people don't care.

Also, most Americans don't want politicians to tell them how to live their lives. They have their rabbis, priests, and ministers to help guide them. Republicans need to get back to the core principles of their party. Buy Michael Zak's book "Back to Basics for the Republican Party" for a clue on how to start. Most blacks today have no idea about the racist origins of the Democratic Party, and that's our fault for ignoring this community. The GOP is up against the most powerful ally of the Democrats — liberal journalists who engineered this coup to get their left-wingers, Marxists, and socialists back in power. Their influence will wane when the public stops supporting them.

That's why I think a Rudy Guiliani should be given a chance. A President can influence morality (look at the upsurge in 12 year olds versed in giving "hummers" thanks to President Clinton's popularization of "Lewinskis") but he can't influence the Supreme Court--other than judicial nominees. But even still, as I said before, even if Roe is overturned, states will uphold abortion rights. They just will. Or most will. Enough will to keep getting American women abortions "on demand".

Republicans can embrace the "culture of life" ideal, while remembering that the populace is driven by self-interest. Alexander Hamilton knew this when he constituted the financial system of the United States. He said this about the kind of woman he wanted:

Such a wife as I want... must be young, handsome I lay most stress upon a good shape, sensible a little learning will do, well-bread, chaste, and tender. As to religion, a moderate stock will satisfy me. She must believe in God and hate a saint.

Americans in general hate to be preached at. They distrust holy rollers. They go to church for that sort of thing and Christians, especially, know about hypocrites--they just believe God is a bigger solution than man. And like Ms. Colon says, "if we were a moral country....". If, indeed. We're not.

Republicans need to accept this fact. I'm not saying that an Evangelicals should abandon their principles. I'm just saying that we need to leave the preaching in church.

Big ideals, soaring rhetoric Peggy Noonan style coupled with hard-nosed, small-government, low taxes, no more entitlements, and outta-my-business legislation needs to be the Republican focus.

We don't need McCain with his big-government legislation. We don't need more condescending, ignore-the-voter Republicans. That is what we have Democrats for. Republicans need to listen to the people and remember where they come from. Republicans need to accept the fact that none of them will get positive press unless they are closet Democrats ala McCain.

Screw it! The biggest sin in the world is trying to be everything to everyone. Keep it simple. Keep it honest. Keep in mind what people really want.

From the very beginning, twelve years ago, the Republicans have fumbled in the end-zone more times than I can count. They have never been a comfortable leading party--except acting like fat cats. They could take a lesson from Democrats in putting the screws to the opposition. But look what Republicans do to hard-nosed politicians like Tom DeLay: they sell them out. What a bunch of wussies. Squeamish wielding power. Contemptuous. Just like terrorists, the opposition sees that soft underbelly and sharpens the knife.

Republicans need to grow up and respect their voters more, and respect Democrats more. The Democrats are worthy foes. They are political foes. They are not political friends. They are as ideologically different as east is from west--at least that's what I used to believe. But the Republicans acted a whole lot like Democrats these last six years.

Their luke -warmness made the voters sick and they spit them out. Would that the Republicans would be either hot or cold. Let's hope they learn the lesson of this election. "Abortion" is exhibit "A" and just the beginning of the lessons they need to learn.

Spanked by the Anchoress

And she's not the only one! After moping and maudlin behavior yesterday, partly due to end-of-week-itis fatigue (although that is certainly not an excuse--especially on Veteran's Day for heavens sake!), I read two posts that smacked me good and got my attention.

Every once in a while a Hell, Fire, and Brimstone, and stern words of exhortation are good for the soul. Today at church, we had a sermon on Faith. The scripture that stuck with me in Hebrews 11:

13All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth. 14People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.

And then, tonight, The Anchoress says this:

I know many people are depressed, but while I am not happy about the election outcome, I do think it’s unseemly for Christians, at least, to be depressed…our God is not politics or the GOP, right?

Yes, ma'am. You are absolutely correct. She gives an example of divine providence and why our faith should be in Above not men:

Good always overcomes evil…we just don’t always understand what that looks like while we’re in the thick of things, or recognise it when it comes our way. But the Holy Spirit has a way of working with things that look like disasters, and making them work for the best. Remember when Rudy Giuliani had to bow out of the senate race from the prostate cancer? Everyone mourned, we know only he could beat Hillary and we thought, “what a freaking disaster…”

But because he bowed out of that race, he was the mayor of NYC when 9/11 happened…and he was exactly the man that needed to be there. Had he been a senator, the truly goofy and uninspiring Mark Greene would have been mayor and he would have terrified us even more.

Like The Anchoress, I felt that Rudy was there for a reason. He was a man for a season.

And then, via Instapundit, I read Mary Katherine Ham's brilliant piece. She said:

That same attitude is written all over the Democrats' reactions to electoral losses since 2000. They haven't trusted the judgment of the people and worked to change their message to reach them. Instead they have blamed the American people for being clods and dullards who are inexplicably disinclined to vote "in their own self-interest." Remember "What's Wrong With Kansas?" and "How CAn 59,054,087 People Be So Dumb?"

Alternatively, they have blamed Diebold and Bush for stealing elections because, after all, how can 59,054,087 people be so dumb, right? It must have been a conspiracy.

I'm so glad our side doesn't act the same way.

Most importantly, we didn’t lose because our countrymen suddenly misplaced the virtues that make America great. It is a distinctly liberal trait to blame “the people” when they don’t vote as one would dictate. I’ll brook none of that from our side. The fact is, we thought our country would be better off with a Republican congress. We made a case to the American people. They didn’t buy it because they thought it was a weak case.

OK, so time to get back to work. And what will that work look like? I have some ideas and so do other much smarter people, but that's for another post coming to you soon.

Why I'm Depressed

Illegal immigration will never be dealt with in a serious way.

American public servants must fear an international hate crowd intent on prosecuting them for hate crimes.

Some (I'm hoping it's just some) of our youth have zero respect or love for the country that gives them so much.

And all this on the heels of Veteran's Day. And I can't help but wondering how Iraq Vets feel seeing the Democrats so eagerly wanting to destroy their work.

Do Americans remember the cost of freedom?

Or will counting Jews and decrying the "influence of Israel" be the order of the new day? And why the hell did 87% of Jews vote Democrat again?

I'm Depressed

OK, I'll admit it. I just haven't been in the mood to put on my game face so I've been reading PerezHilton and eating Twinkies. (That last part isn't true, but the first part is.) The link is on the side, I can't get Firefox to work today. Oy! Another reason for post-electoral frustration.

Sorry all. I'm overcome with ennui.

Glum, Make That Grim, Mood--UPDATE

To lighten my post-election blues, I'm listening to Cat Steven's "Morning Has Broken" on my I-Pod.

I'm not the only one feeling grim. She is. And he is. And so is she.


UPDATE: Evidently Cat Stevens has further revealed his penchant to be a Islamofascist scumbag. Who woulda thought?

Duetche Welle: "Europeans Revel in US Republican's Defeat"

And I revel in the fact that Europe's national language will soon be Arabic. (Update: I really don't. This is called sarcasm.)

Do they really believe that when Democrats take over, the West will cease facing an existential threat in the form of Islamofascism or Islamism (depending on the word of the moment)? Or will they gloat all they way to the guillotine of their own making?

"There is less White House in America now and a little less America in the world," Dominique Moisi, special councillor at the French Institute of International Relations, told Reuters news service.

Even cutting off their noses economically doesn't concern Europe:

Trade talks may sour

Observers also worried that trade negotiations currently underway between the US and the European Union could take a hit, post-election.

"The democratic Congress would probably be marginally more protectionist than the current one and this would not bode well for the current negotiations in the WTO framework, considering in particular that the 'fast track' mandate for the Bush administration for striking a deal expires in July 2007," the European Policy Center's Missiroli said.

Bush's "fast track" negotiating power allows him to authorize trade deals.

Who cares about the economy slowing further in Europe the favorite scapegoat is weakened? Let's keep our priorities straight here!

It so interesting to see the European Nations turn into the Middle East. All their economic misery, immigration problems, pessimism gets externalized in the form of an American President--who they don't vote for, who has no control of their economic, social or foreign policy and who will be out of office sooner rather than later. Who will they blame then?

Bush Working with Those of Like Mind

When I heard President Bush say how hard he'd work with the Democrats:

Within hours of an election that puts Democrats in charge of the House and the Senate for the final two years of Bush's presidency, the president and the woman all but certain to be House speaker proclaimed reconciliation.

I mused to myself: If only he'd taken that tack with his own party. Wait a minute, the only thing he agrees with his party on is the War in Iraq. (OK, and cutting taxes.)

I've said it before, and want to say it again, the Democrats will look back some day with fondness on old G.W. He's a Big Government guy if there was ever was one. Education, a whole new branch of Government (Homeland Security), more Medicare spending with the drug benefit, Amnesty, the list is long.

Seeing the President happily work with the Democrats will make me wretch after his obstruction of his own party's desire for a fence on the Southern border. After not vetoing all the pork-laden crap that passed for legislation, it will make me nuts to see him approve even more pork in the hands of the Democrats.

One bonus of the Democrats: they want to lower student load interest rates. Hey Dems! Go one better and give students the ability to refinance as many times as they want, like you do for home mortgages. Go another better and stop raising student loan limits. Make the colleges cut their expenses. Talk about cutting a fat hog. Colleges have increased fees and tuition, for what exactly? Restrict loans and suddenly the college rates will be restricted, too.

As an aside, though, does it show you where the Dem's heads are at when their big issues are the minimum wage and student loans when we have an enemy wanting to destroy the U.S.? It's frakkin' surreal. Ameritopia, man. Gotta love it!

Ann Althouse Has Pictures

If you want to know what a bunch of bloggers together look like blogging the election go visit. She promises cogent analysis tomorrow. I expect nothing less!

Duke Rape Idiot Prosecuter Re-Elected

His race-mongering and travesty of justice will continue. Some encouraging words from Liestoppers:

LieStoppers will still be here tomorrow morning, breathing fire. Forget despair… think dogged determination. We don't do angst, we redouble our efforts. Every Ashley propaganda piece has fueled a stunning rebuttal from someone on the blog. A twisted missive popping up from the professor-ly-pitiful Gang of 88 is manna for our creative heaven. Every Nifong outrage inspires us, rejuvenates us, rededicates us. I know these LieStoppers. A Nifong victory tonight will not bring ANY of us to despair. It will burnish ALL of us to whatever brilliance we might hope to possess. We will dig deeper, we will delve further… we will leave no stone unturned. We will write and rhyme and reason... parse the law and produce wickedly funny cartoons. We will not be eviscerated by a Nifong win today… by heaven, this crew will be invigorated.

I keep imagining those boy's families. They must be devastated. How utterly disappointing. KC Johnson describes the travesty:

Last night’s results confirmed the existence of a larger constituency for the politics of revenge and prosecutorial misconduct than anyone could have thought possible seven months ago. But Nifong offered more than simple, Chan Hall-style revenge: with some well-timed assistance from others, his actions and rhetoric helped recreate in Durham a mirror image of the Deep South legal system of the late 1950s.

This case gives me a very bad feeling. KC Johnson is right. There seems to be race-based rage that equals the reverse from the '50s. I see a public lynching coming.

Parents, don't send your children to Duke.

Huge Turnout Is Good For America--UPDATE

While the Nation is polarized, the Nation is also engaged.

Via Glenn Reynolds, John Podhoretz says this:

Happy or suicidal with tonight's results, something colossal and profoundly important has happened in the United States beginning in 2000 — the re-engagement of the American people with politics. We have had four enormously consequential elections in a row now in which voters have cast their ballots in numbers that we were told we'd never see in our lifetimes. I don't see how you can view this as anything but a wondrous development for the United States.

As long as all results are legal and fair and valid, huge turnout and the other guys winning bothers me less. My side has work to do and we need to get to work.

I think the political class has been smug and entitled and self-satisfied and lazy. I think they believe that they have shown scorn to the people who have gotten them into office. They need to know that it's a new day in America. They need to remember the voters. They need to represent the voter's interests, but more importantly, they need to remember America's best interests.

UPDATE:
Ace makes a really good point and this would be the downside of the "new day in America":

Mickey Kaus has been calling this the "perverse" election for a while.

Bush's policies are unpopular, it seems. Especially his immigration policy. Americans don't like his amnesty plan.

So, if America votes in a Democratic House, they'll get the policies they favor, right?

Well, not so much.

Here it comes -- now America gets the Bush Amnesty Plan it didn't want.

Congrats, enjoy!

Millions upon millions of new Democratic voters! Hey, no problem, we're in the minority anyway, right?

Thanks to HotAir.

I'm afraid this is exactly what we'll get--exactly what we didn't (and I mean Democrat and Republican voters) want.

Predictions--UPDATE

UPDATE: Well, maybe the pessimists are right. Sometimes it is so disappointing to be an optimist, you know?

My question is this: Will the Dems come out for blood? Scandal, scandal, scandal? Or will they actually formulate plans, get more fiscally conservative and generally do what Reagan Republicans usually do? I vote for the former. There is so much venom and vitriol all around.

The Republicans have refused, and we can thank the President and Senate for this, to do much that is truly conservative--they dithered on Immigration and like Fred Barnes says, they deep-sixed the Presidents valid and necessary Social Security reforms in favor of....more dithering. The "moderate" middle needs to be smacked. Olympia Snowe, John McCain, Chaffee, Arlen Specter also can accept some of the thanks for this mess. They simply would not let conservative values become a priority.

Think I'm wrong? Heck, the Democrats getting elected sound more like Republicans. OK, more later.

********************************

For what it's worth, John Hawkins has a round-up of predictions. Any way you slice these predictions feels dire to me and rather pessimistic (give me a break! Bill Kristol says we lose 40 seats in the House) but I'm no political prediction specialist. I go by "feelings". Here are my feelings:

1. Polls will always favor Democrats based on how questions are asked and who actually takes the time to answer the questions.
2. High turn-out benefits Republicans.
3. Exit polls always favor Democrats. They are very concerned about being "heard." The Republicans figure their vote speaks for itself.
   
4. While I believe Republicans are p.o.'d at Bush, it's because he isn't being aggressive enough, not conservative enough. How would a Democrat Congress help this? It doesn't make sense.
5. Talk is cheap. Action matters. I just don't believe that average Americans are that outraged at Iraq. The economy is good. Democrats=Tax. Democrats=Cowardice. This nags at sensible people.

Feelings. Nothing but feelings. Maybe if I were looking at the data the Republican insiders were looking at I'd be terrified, too. Then why is Rove so confident?

A Shout Out to Progressives Everywhere

This tune goes out to the conspiracy theorists, the anxious, the true believers, the pure in ideals, the Machiavellians (I know that seems like a non-sequitor), the trial lawyers, the Democrats so out-of-their-minds at the notion of losing that they're currently "losing it" due to the polls tightening up: the song lyrics for the song "Crazy" by Gnarls Barkley for your pleasure.

I remember when, I remember, I remember when I lost my mind
There was something so pleasant about that phase.
Even your emotions had an echo
In so much space

And when you're out there
Without care,
Yeah, I was out of touch
But it wasn't because I didn't know enough
I just knew too much

Does that make me crazy
Does that make me crazy
Does that make me crazy
Probably

And I hope that you are having the time of your life
But think twice, that's my only advice
Come on now, who do you, who do you, who do you, who do you think you are,
Ha ha ha bless your soul
You really think you're in control

Well, I think you're crazy
I think you're crazy
I think you're crazy
Just like me

My heroes had the heart to lose their lives out on a limb
And all I remember is thinking, I want to be like them
Ever since I was little, ever since I was little it looked like fun
And it's no coincidence I've come
And I can die when I'm done

Maybe I'm crazy
Maybe you're crazy
Maybe we're crazy
Probably

Election Round-Up

The Anchoress has a good round-up. Everything about everything and links to everywhere.

Man, I'm nervous. This is a nail-biting day. I was involved in politics all the way from Fifth Grade when I learned the power of a vote: I voted for my opponent (I campaigned with Mickey Mouse signs saying "Vote for Melissa!") to be "polite" and lost the Student Body President election by one vote.

NEVER AGAIN!

Ha! No I wasn't permanently scarred, but I did learn a very good lesson in representative democracies and the power of ONE to make a huge difference. Cynical? You experience the power of one every time you're behind grandma on the freeway that's backed up for miles. Yes, indeed, one person can make a difference.