The Ongoing Election Autopsy
Michael Rubin LINKS to something pretty SCARY.
The audio message, whose authenticity has not been verified, was published on Islamist websites and was said to be the voice of Abu Hamza al-Muhajir.
The Democrats’ victory in Tuesday’s Congressional elections was a move in the right direction, the speaker said.
Outgoing US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had stepped down to flee the Iraqi battlefield, he added.
He told US President George W Bush to “stay on the battleground”.
“I tell the lame duck (US administration) do not rush to escape as did your defense minister.
“The American people have taken a step in the right path to come out of their predicament… they voted for a level of reason,” the voice said.
It was a lot easier to say “with friends like these” when “we” were in power. Now, it’s much more worrisome.
Tim Chapman, over at his eponymous blog, has several interesting posts. THIS one puts forward his general theory, and THIS one is a list. The “scandal” portion of the list is long, but that seems like it could be lumped with “liberal,” in some ways. At the very least it should not be lumped under “conservative.” (HT: RED STATE)
And THIS (.pdf format warning) seems to support the general claim.
The Ignoramus passed on this Krauthammer JEM - excellent as always, but particularly noteworthy for two reasons: its wonderful football analogies, and the fact that it says what I’ve been trying to say since Tuesday. But much, much better than I could ever say it.
But the great Democratic wave of 2006 is nothing remotely like the great structural change some are trumpeting. It was an event-driven election that produced the shift of power one would expect when a finely balanced electorate swings mildly one way or the other.
This is not realignment. As has been the case for decades, American politics continues to be fought between the 40-yard lines. The Europeans fight goal line to goal line, from socialist left to the ultranationalist right. On the American political spectrum, these extremes are negligible. American elections are fought on much narrower ideological grounds. In this election, the Democrats carried the ball from their own 45-yard line to the Republican 45-yard line.
The fact that the Democrats crossed midfield does not make this election a great anti-conservative swing. Republican losses included a massacre of moderate Republicans in the Northeast and Midwest. And Democratic gains included the addition of many conservative Democrats, brilliantly recruited by Rep. Rahm Emanuel with classic Clintonian triangulation. Hence Heath Shuler of North Carolina, anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-tax — and now a Democratic congressman.
The result is that both parties have moved to the right. The Republicans have shed the last vestiges of their centrist past, the Rockefeller Republican. And the Democrats have widened their tent to bring in a new crop of blue-dog conservatives.
That’s what is a bit frustrating to me about all this analysis. We’re looking at ourselves a lot right now - which is important and right, because it’s our fault. Still, we should not ignore the other side. Examining them is not as important as straightening ourselves out, of course. But it is very instructive.
And besides, why would THIS be happening if it weren’t true that this election was not a rejection of conservative principles, but the contrary? Not even Nancy’s folks want the world to think they agree with her!