Lee P. Butler
Bush's political lieutenant, told a closed-door meeting of 2008 Republican
House candidates and their aides Tuesday that it was less the war in Iraq than
corruption in Congress that caused their party's defeat in the 2006 elections,”
Washington insider Robert Novak recently wrote.
He also added, “Rove's clear advice to the candidates is to distance themselves
from the culture of Washington. Specifically, Republican candidates are urged
to make clear they have no connection with disgraced congressmen such as Duke
Cunningham and Mark Foley. In effect, Rove was rebutting the complaint inside
the party that George W. Bush is responsible for Republican miseries by
folks, it’s time to
really analyze the whole ‘Republicans lost the 2006 election because Americans
want the troops out of Iraq now’ mantra that has been so prevalent in the
liberal elitist media.
is partly correct
in his alleged assessment, but there were many more factors than just Iraq and
the media driven perception of a ’culture of corruption’ that led to the loss
and overall it was a district by district battle that simply added up to a
a sweeping, powerful
embracing of the Democrat Party by Americans, as they have contended and
continues to be promoted by liberal media elitists.
incumbent Republicans in the district-by-district cases were buoyed by the fact
that a large percentage of Conservative and Independent voters simply chose not
to vote, which allowed the Democrat to win in most of those districts, some by
the skin of their teeth.
spite of that, the
liberal media keeps flogging for the Democrats. In a recent Associated Press
report titled, ‘GOP wait for nominee to emerge’, the liberal reporter refers to
two Republicans who point out that President Bush is or will soon be a
non-factor in the upcoming election and they are waiting for the GOP
presidential nominee so they can move ahead.
is not an attack on
President Bush or a distancing of Republicans from him as was asserted by the
liberal reporter writing the piece, but a standard issuance of feeling that in
the upcoming election President Bush is not running for re-election and another
Republican hopeful is vying for the job he is vacating.
the story that was
supposed to be about the Republican presidential nominee turned into a ‘promote
the Democrat agenda power-point’ presentation. “Democrats dismiss such comments
as wishful thinking. They won control of the House and Senate in 2006 largely because
of voters' unhappiness with Bush and the war. They are banking on Bush's even
lower popularity now to help them to further victories next year.”
what does that
have to do with Republicans waiting for a candidate to emerge, which was
supposed to be the premise of the ‘news report?’
Bush’s low popularity as a whole… but still stands at 63% with Republicans…
have anything to do with how a future candidate for president would connect or
fail to connect with the American electorate?
about the primaries here (Party members choosing their Party‘s presidential
representative), not the general election.
the elitist media
continues to portray to the public is that most Americans are against the war
(that‘s the real subject of this Democrat hit piece designed as a ‘news
report‘)… the polls liberal media elitists create showing American
dissatisfaction qualifies this assertion for them… and because of that
Americans want the troops to come home now.
let’s pull over to
the sidewalk and take a look at these purported polls the liberals taunt as
their Holy Grail of the claim that ‘Americans are against the war’ mantra.
the most recent
CBS/New York Times poll (July 20-22, 2007) this question was asked, "From
what you have seen or heard about the situation in Iraq, what should the United
States do now? Should the U.S. increase the number of U.S. troops in Iraq, keep
the same number of U.S. troops in Iraq as there are now, decrease the number of
U.S. troops in Iraq, or remove all its troops from Iraq?"
12%, Same: 15%, Decrease: 30%, Remove all: 36%.
even though ‘remove
all’ had the largest number; and would ultimately be used by the media to make
misleading headlines, only 36% wanted to remove all the troops from Iraq the
way leading Democrat presidential candidates are calling for.
clearly see that the other three choices want some troops to remain in Iraq by
a count of… hold your breath… 57%! Realize, more of the respondents could have
chosen to remove all, but didn’t. Having been given alternate choices to
increase, keep the same or simply decrease levels, a clear majority chose one
of those three.
not the story
being painted by liberal media elitists and it‘s their own polls they are
manipulating as they try desperately to justify their coverage and hide their
a July 11-12, 2007
Newsweek poll this question was asked, "Which of the following four
choices comes closest to your view about what the U.S. should do in Iraq? Begin
an immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops in Iraq. OR, Start withdrawing
troops by the fall, with all troops out by next spring. OR, Leave a substantial
number of troops in Iraq, but have them fall back to their bases and
concentrate on training Iraqis and targeting Al Qaeda in Iraq leaders. OR, Make
no cutbacks in U.S. troops."
withdrawal: 19%, Out by next Spring: 24%, Fall back to their bases: 40%, Make
no cutbacks: 13%.
look at the
results without the media mantra Democrat talking points. Only 19% wants an
immediate withdrawal the way the Democrat presidential hopefuls are saying they
want. A whopping 74% of respondents want the troops to stay in country at least
until next Spring.
I ask you, did the
Democrats win control of Congress because the American people want the troops
to be removed from Iraq now? And, as the polls clearly reflect, since they want
the troops to stay there in some form or fashion how can it be portrayed
without it being a blatant outright lie that America is against the war?
an aside, just to
galvanize the point that the majority of the media are liberal cheerleaders for
Democrats, here’s another question asked in that same Newsweek poll,
"Which of the following do you blame MOST for the current situation in
Iraq: [see below]?"
results; The White
House: 40%, Iraqi leaders: 33%, Congress: 13%, The U.S. Military: 2%,
about that? You tell me, why wasn’t ’terrorists’ one of the selections for the
respondents to choose from?
course to liberals,
terrorists aren’t the problem. America and it’s Imperialistic endeavor to get
Iraqi oil is and oh, by-the-way, we’re creating even more terrorists while we
fight for Iraqi freedom from tyranny.
truth is as far as
being against the war in Iraq, Conservatives not voting in 2006 causing
Democrats to win wasn’t because they wanted the troops out of Iraq, but because
they wanted a more aggressive approach to winning the war.
far the biggest
reason Conservatives didn’t vote in 2006 was the fact that so many felt
disenfranchised by the members of the Republican Party in congress who in many
cases seemed to and in some cases actually did, lose sight of why the people
had elected them in the first place… Conservative principles.
simply lost touch with Conservative constituents and what it means to be
elected by the people, for the people and to represent the people. For
Republicans to win in 2008 they will have to once again, as they did in the
early Nineties, prove to the people that they are worthy of their trust and
ultimately their vote.