Daily Archives: November 9, 2006

Why Did it Happen? And What Happens in Iraq Now?


What happens now? What happens in Iraq? Do we ‘cut and run’? Do we cut slowly and the scramble? We’re talking about it on the show tonight.

Why did this happen?

Hugh Hewitt:

Hewitt on the House:

Congressional leadership time and time again took the easy way out and declared truces with Democrats over issues, which ought not to have been compromised. The easy way led to Tuesday’s result.
The criminal activities of Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney and Mark Foley were anchors around every Republican neck, and the damaged leadership could not figure out that the only way to slip that weight was by staying in town and working around the clock on issue after issue. The long recesses and the unwillingness to confront the issues head on –remember the House’s inexplicable refusal to condemn the New York Times by name in a resolution over the SWIFT program leak?– conveyed a smugness about the majority which was rooted in redistricting’s false assurance of invulnerability.

Hewitt weighs in on the Senate:
On April 15, 2005 –less than three months after President Bush had begun a second term won in part because of his pledge to fight for sound judges– Senator McCain appeared on Hardball and announced he would not support the “constitutional option” to end Democratic filibusters.

A few months later there came a debate in the Senate over the Democrats’ demand for a timetable for withdrawal for Iraq led to another half-measure: A Frist-Warner alternative that demanded quarterly reports on the war’s progress, a move widely and correctly interpreted as a blow to the Administration’s Iraq policy. Fourteen Republicans voted against the Frist-Warner proposal –including Senator McCain– and the press immediately understood that the half-measure was an early indicator of erosion in support for a policy of victory.

Nor did the Senate get around to confirming the president’s authority to conduct warrantless surveillance of al Qaeda contacting its operatives in the United States. Weeks were taken up jamming the incoherent McCain-Kennedy immigration bill through the Judiciary Committee only to see it repudiated by the majority of Republicans…

The rest is here.
The inescapable conclusion is: THE REPUBLICANS FAILED TO BE
CONSERVATIVE.

Maybe DEMOCRAT Charlie Rangel’s Military Draft proposal will get a hearing. Do you think the MSM will NOW properly cite just whose idea this was, is, and always has been? Naw. I don’t either.
Speaking of the opponents of the war. Read this piece in the Weekly Standard about watching election returns with Cindy Sheehan. Good piece.

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

Why Did it Happen? And What Happens in Iraq Now?


What happens now? What happens in Iraq? Do we ‘cut and run’? Do we cut slowly and the scramble? We’re talking about it on the show tonight.

Why did this happen?

Hugh Hewitt:

Hewitt on the House:

Congressional leadership time and time again took the easy way out and declared truces with Democrats over issues, which ought not to have been compromised. The easy way led to Tuesday’s result.
The criminal activities of Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney and Mark Foley were anchors around every Republican neck, and the damaged leadership could not figure out that the only way to slip that weight was by staying in town and working around the clock on issue after issue. The long recesses and the unwillingness to confront the issues head on –remember the House’s inexplicable refusal to condemn the New York Times by name in a resolution over the SWIFT program leak?– conveyed a smugness about the majority which was rooted in redistricting’s false assurance of invulnerability.

Hewitt weighs in on the Senate:
On April 15, 2005 –less than three months after President Bush had begun a second term won in part because of his pledge to fight for sound judges– Senator McCain appeared on Hardball and announced he would not support the “constitutional option” to end Democratic filibusters.

A few months later there came a debate in the Senate over the Democrats’ demand for a timetable for withdrawal for Iraq led to another half-measure: A Frist-Warner alternative that demanded quarterly reports on the war’s progress, a move widely and correctly interpreted as a blow to the Administration’s Iraq policy. Fourteen Republicans voted against the Frist-Warner proposal –including Senator McCain– and the press immediately understood that the half-measure was an early indicator of erosion in support for a policy of victory.

Nor did the Senate get around to confirming the president’s authority to conduct warrantless surveillance of al Qaeda contacting its operatives in the United States. Weeks were taken up jamming the incoherent McCain-Kennedy immigration bill through the Judiciary Committee only to see it repudiated by the majority of Republicans…

The rest is here.
The inescapable conclusion is: THE REPUBLICANS FAILED TO BE
CONSERVATIVE.

Maybe DEMOCRAT Charlie Rangel’s Military Draft proposal will get a hearing. Do you think the MSM will NOW properly cite just whose idea this was, is, and always has been? Naw. I don’t either.
Speaking of the opponents of the war. Read this piece in the Weekly Standard about watching election returns with Cindy Sheehan. Good piece.

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com