Yet there is a silver lining by Tom Evers

Yet there is a silver lining

By Tom Evers

December 17, 2007

Unlike my Democratic counterparts, I'm willing to concede that my party is not perfect. And unlike many of my Republican colleagues, I'm willing to admit that my President, George W. Bush, has very clear deficiencies in communication and vision which have hampered Republican efforts to explain and advance the noblest of policy measures. I know that some may think I'm doing our opponents' bidding by criticizing "W", however, many of us who are forward looking in our approach and thinking need to admit the truth, and correct our failed courses of action if we are to retake Congress, and maintain our foothold in the White House.

Every four years, we hear the same rhetoric about how critical the current election is. In fact we hear this so often that electorate turns a deaf ear and rebukes all of us as opportunists simply crying wolf. But these times are in fact much different than the domestic squabbles of rich and poor, tax policy, class warfare, and welfare reform that dominated the 90s.

The most important driving issue for the United States - since 9-11 is the handling of foreign policy and our national security. And the Republicans and Democrats - at least on paper (and video) represent two very different views of the problems at hand which will no doubt define the outcome of the 2008 Presidential election. Liberals and Democrats hate this line of thinking because they are well aware that even though this war is not popular, that when push comes to shove, neither is notion of emboldening our enemies by laying down our arms and withdrawing from the fight in the Middle East region. People who talk of doing so are aiding our enemies who pray we do just that. With that being the case, Democrats have the tougher road in a Presidential contest by attempting to explain to the public just why any of us would be safer if walked away and gave our enemies the high ground.

Democrats will argue that there isn't a battle to be waged; that all of this is made up for the purposes of fear mongering and electioneering. They will also cite body counts, injuries, war financials, and pull heartstrings by peddling about grief-stricken parents who have made the ultimate sacrifice for what Democrats will deem as "no good reason". But there is good reason. And I agree that the war does stink, but there is absolutely nothing in terms of strategy or evidence from the Democratic camp that suggest that they have any spectacular ideas about how to productively change course, or expedite progress in any of these areas.

And since Nancy Pelosi and her colleagues have taken majority control of Congress, it's been incredibly clear to everyone (including their advocates) that they are incapable of forging progress on the smallest domestic policy. In fact, from my own view, for a party that recently held Congress for over 50 years they appear disorganized and as disjointed as one could ever expect. Recent polls show that while President Bush hangs in at a dismal 37% approval rating, Congress sets the low bar with a 22% approval rating. That's an alarming trend.

And the MoveOn.org crowd will embarrass their candidates by continuing to publicly argue that we brought this war on ourselves. The liberal academics behind the scenes that craft their rhetoric have no love for the United States, and see a land of empty promises and failures on every front. Democrats know they can't win on a message that vilifies our Government and our people. How Democratic candidates will distance themselves from their base will be remarkable, if not entertaining to watch. Can the voices of their mad activists be muffled, or will the Democratic Party implode from within?

Getting back to my main point - the answer to the war on terror is time; a lot of it. And that means more deaths, more injuries, and more war expenditure. In turn that means fewer attacks on American soil, and a safer home-front. This is a Pandora's Box for Democrats who can't publicly root for a successful attack by the Islamic religious maniacs, so the best they can do is jump on media stories that find holes in airport security lines, and hope that these minor stories somehow resonate with the public.

But have no fear, the left wing of the Democratic Party will run their own nominee into the ground come next November. You've already read that Nancy Pelosi is fending them off with a stick since in their view she's not been liberal or activist enough to suit their endless desires for a fantasy utopia filled with world peace and free healthcare, etc. The left wants out of the Iraq and Afghanistan, and most of the Democratic Candidates (with the exception of those who don't stand a chance anyway) actually do recognize that we need to maintain a presence in the Middle East. Democrats have the problem of trying to craft a message that placates their constituents while at the same time continuing what is obviously the only rational course of action - stay the course.

In fact it's such a problem that Democrats can't not even talk about the war in a context that is coherent or clear. President Bush has struggled over the last six years articulating the reasons for current policy (for which there is no good excuse), and yet the opposition finds itself neither in opposition or in lockstep or worse, finds itself with a foot in both lines of thought.

About a year ago, I thought it was a foregone conclusion that Democrats would have the upper hand in this election. After the Democratic machine easily took Congress away from the GOP (which lost sight of its accountabilities to the public), I honestly believed that dark days were ahead. Now I recognize that we are not only on even footing, but given the set of candidates in our field versus the candidates in their field, I find that our group are not only more responsible, realistic, and sensible, but clearly far more electable than any of their front-runners.

Republicans have to make course correction in a few areas, starting with electing ethical leaders, and getting back to basics - by removing the cloud of confusion caused by George Bush's inability to communicate and spearhead discussion of the issue.

They also need to rebuke and reverse Bush's greatest failure as President - not the war, but rather his mishandling of our illegal immigration policy which will have ramifications for decades to come. If national security is our first priority, illegal immigration must be our second. Republicans have a duty to support candidates that will address both of these critical matters upon election.

So there is a silver lining and reason for Republicans to cheer. But there is also a lot of work ahead to stop the master's of deception from controlling the debate. As for W, let's hope he lays low and let's the future leaders duke it out, policy by policy, idea by idea so that Americans have a clear choice on election day.