I think that we can all agree that both houses are going more Dem next year. If anybody disputes that it's open for discussion.
The electorate has stated unequivocally that it wants the war to finish. You may disagree with them, but it is evident that the war is the #1 issue this cycle. The Dems have received the lion's share of donations, attendees, supporters.... Ask them why and they will tell you: The war.
Looking at all the public opinion polling, the fact is indisputable: The war is the #1 criteria this year and 3 out of 4 Americans want our troops home. The conclusion from this is inescapable:
The next president of the United States will not be pro-Iraq war. Which also means that any hopes of stabilizing Iraq will end in January 2009 when our new anti-war commander-in-chief is sworn in. In other words, there *is* a hard deadline for the Iraq war. Call it a timeline for surrender or whatever you like...the rhetoric is immaterial. Unless we are collectively hoping that things will somehow be set right within the next year , it's already lost.
So let's be pragmatic for just a second. The Democrats have many possibilities the general electorate will vote for, but the Republicans have only one: Dr. Ron Paul of Texas.
So who do you want to be our next president with overwhelming Dem majorities in both houses? A tax-and-spend anti-gun liberal, or a fiscally conservative pro-gun president who will appoint strict-constructionist Justices?
Unless you want the former, you'd best get on the ball and start pushing Paul hard. Even if you think he's a loony, even if you disagree with his opposition to the war. It's either him or a Dem.
The electorate has stated unequivocally that it wants the war to finish. You may disagree with them, but it is evident that the war is the #1 issue this cycle. The Dems have received the lion's share of donations, attendees, supporters.... Ask them why and they will tell you: The war.
Looking at all the public opinion polling, the fact is indisputable: The war is the #1 criteria this year and 3 out of 4 Americans want our troops home. The conclusion from this is inescapable:
The next president of the United States will not be pro-Iraq war. Which also means that any hopes of stabilizing Iraq will end in January 2009 when our new anti-war commander-in-chief is sworn in. In other words, there *is* a hard deadline for the Iraq war. Call it a timeline for surrender or whatever you like...the rhetoric is immaterial. Unless we are collectively hoping that things will somehow be set right within the next year , it's already lost.
So let's be pragmatic for just a second. The Democrats have many possibilities the general electorate will vote for, but the Republicans have only one: Dr. Ron Paul of Texas.
So who do you want to be our next president with overwhelming Dem majorities in both houses? A tax-and-spend anti-gun liberal, or a fiscally conservative pro-gun president who will appoint strict-constructionist Justices?
Unless you want the former, you'd best get on the ball and start pushing Paul hard. Even if you think he's a loony, even if you disagree with his opposition to the war. It's either him or a Dem.