Thoughts on election results

Stephen Slivinski of the Cato Institute thinks we'll all be better off with gridlock. Of course the price for this gridlock is Nancy Pelosi's agenda. Let's hope Bush finally breaks in his veto pen.

Losing 29 House seats and 6 Senate seats is the norm for a 6th year election. So far it looks like Republicans lost 26 House seats and 6 Senate seats. Boy was my prediction wrong. You can't gerrymander the Senate, so this looks pretty typical, though losing 6 governorships is pretty tough. The Republicans got just what they deserved, spanked. In a choice between big government, big spending, corrupt Democrats and corrupt, big spending, big government Republicans, libertarians stayed home like most Americans, and Republicans were the big losers. It looks like the majorities in the House and Senate are smaller than before, so the government shouldn't be able to cause as much damage.

It was interesting to hear John McCain, arguably the worst of the Republicans, get it right last night. He said that Republicans were being punished for their big spending, corrupt ways. He said voters elected them to reform government, and instead they Republicans became more interested in power than reform. He's exactly right, but it was funny coming from the author of the McCain/Feingold abomination who voted for every spending increase Republicans offered up.

Rahm Emmanual got it exactly wrong. He thinks Americans voted for big government Democrats, when they really voted against big government Republicans. That means Democrats will try to claim a mandate to pass their socialist agenda. The problem is most of the new Democrats are more conservative than the Republicans they defeated. I believe the make-up of the new Congress is more conservative than the latest Congress, but it will be led by the loony left contingent. It'll be interesting to see how that plays out. Bush better get a lot of ink for his veto pen. Democrats will have a hard time trying to push retreat in Iraq while claiming to support the troops. The Democrat leaders and the terrorists will work hard to turn Iraq into another Vietnam.

The big winner is the accomplice press. The mainstream, liberal side got control of Congress. They'll be parading like peacocks. The conservative side gets 2 years of socialist policies and Democrat stupidity to attack. Talk radio will burn up the airwaves.

The big loser is Americans, but they're the big loser in every election. At least gridlock works in our favor. The biggest story of every election, the story never told, is that neither party represents mainstream America. Both parties support the minority of Americans who want bigger government. Mainstream America wants smaller government. If Republicans were smart, their '08 platform would: 1) hold discretionary spending flat for 2 years, 2) reform entitlements, 3) No more pork, 4) support the FairTax, and 5) stop the southern invasion. Those issues would bring Republicans a landslide victory.

McCain's comments provide hope for the 2008. If Republicans really do learn the lesson that America wants smaller government, tax reform, and end to the southern invasion, and to defeat our enemies, Republicans can rebound in '08. I don't think that can happen if McCain is the Republican candidate, though. He's just another liberal running as a Republican. Newt is a far better choice for Republicans and America.

This should be a wake-up call to the Libertarian party. America is libertarian, but the Libertarian party is so weak on defense, it can't get any traction with the people. If the Libertarian party accepts the need to stop the southern invasion and to defeat our enemies, they could be a force in '08. If Republicans nominate a liberal like McCain or Guliani, the Libertarians should make strong showing.

The good news is the '06 election is over. The bad news is the '08 campaign has begun. I'm reading High Crimes and Misdemeanors to prepare for another Billary candidacy. I also have Reagan's Revolution ready to read. You can never be too prepared.