More on why we lost

From RedState, I wholeheartedly agree with this writer’s assessment: stop trying to be friends with those who want to crush you. Maybe, after two disastrous years of Obama and buyer’s remorse — and mark my word there will be buyer’s remorese — we’ll grow a pair and win back Congress and then the White House in 2012.

We lost this because of our own obsession…
I intentionally embargoed myself from posting this because I didn’t want to be an example of “depressing” the vote.
So therefore, as I sit here and watch election results come in, and I see an Obama victory. I have one question to ask: [continued]
Are all you “redstate.com’ers” happy about your obsession with nominating McCain because he was “the only one that could beat Hillary or Barack?”
I was a Romney supporter… don’t you think that he would be doing much better right now given the economic situation? Not that any of us could have foreseen the meltdown, but Romney was not an active member of the House or Senate nor attached to the sitting President. (And please… no one start talking about Romney’s Mormonism. I am a Catholic… and I did/would have voted for him)
So what happened to the “maverick”… how are you a “maverick” when you won’t even attack your political enemy for things that are BLATANTLY obvious? (J. Wright, Pflager, coal industry, redistribution of wealth, etc, etc)
Palin was a good add on… maybe because he knew he was sinking with conservatives, but after the convention, they muzzled her… badly. When I voted, I voted for Palin… because she will be the torch bearer from now on.
I am not trying to “Monday morning quarterback” here, but I remember back in January how many people on this site were saying “McCain is the only one that can beat Hillary…” and “McCain is the only one that can be Barack.”
Hillary beat herself, and Barack was a sitting duck on so many things. McCain claimed to be a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution. Reagan would have kicked Obama’s butt on the issues that came to light. He wouldn’t have treated any of these with kid gloves. He would have done it with respect and dignity, but he still would have addressed them in some form that would have resonated with the people.
I sincerely “hope” that you people that have been obsessed with defeating a candidate with a GOP’er because of their ability to “reach across the aisle” have learned you lesson.
You get nothing from reaching across the aisle… unless it is to crush the larynx of your vocal opposition.
We – as REAL Conservatives – have got to go back to basics. Stop reaching across the aisle. Stop walking across the aisle to only get your butt kicked.
Don’t be a product of the media… defy the media… from the get go. Don’t run an honorable campaign… run a campaign. Call your political enemy what he/she is.

The rebuilding begins tomorrow.
I hope you people who wanted someone who could woo independents and moderates are happy… it just got us four years of Barack.
May God have some sort of mercy on this country I defended for almost 10 years.
May God have mercy on the 50 million unborn babies who were murdered because of abortion… and that number is about to expand.
May the Immaculate Heart of Mary triumph…
May God have mercy on us all…

3 thoughts on “More on why we lost”

  1. Don’t forget that all of our candidates this time were not ideal. And don’t forget that we got McCain because of a lot of crossover voting in the primaries.
    On the rest I couldn’t agree more. But I am still not convinced that our side gets it. We must be principled conservatives and not brag that we can reach across the aisle. It’s okay to do that, but only if we are not compromising conservative ideals.
    Anyone who has ever read my comments here knows how much I loved Palin early on.

  2. George:
    Just playing devil’s advocate here, so play with me. If there are statistics indicating that there were fewer abortions under Clinton than under Bush, would you say Bush’s policies on preaching abstinence were a failure? If our goal as Catholics is to minimize (indeed, eliminate!) abortions, then do we not applaud the actual reduction of the umber of abortions performed. If you can reduce abortions by providing condoms in schools, do you do it? I ask because these questions need to be aired and answered.

  3. I am decidedly pro-life and I want adoption models opened across the board to deal with this. Where I differ with the Church, however, in that I think condoms and other forms of birth control are perfectly legitimate. Killing babies as a form of birth control is an abomination.
    P.S., this is far from the only issue I disagree with the Church on… 🙂

Comments are closed.