It seems that Republicans are suffering from a serious case of self-doubt.  Everyone is analyzing this election to figure out what went wrong with the Republican Party, and what we need to do to "fix it" so we can become competitive again.

I've read so many different angles about why we lost this voting block or that voting block.  But as far as I'm concerned, it can be boiled down to one very simple thing.  America wants CHANGE.  There is an ebb and flow in American politics, which is perfectly normal.  Once one party has been in power too long, as the Republicans have been, we start to get too much of that party.  Any policy flaws simply become too obvious.  And these flaws are not necessarily flaws in the party, but of one specific group within the party.  In the case of Republicans, the Bush camp has represented Republican policy since 1988.  Bush Republicanism is not, in general, Republicanism.  It's one camp of Republicanism.  And many of the things people are wanting to change are Bush policies.  There is nothing wrong with the Republican Party.  It's just time to get some fresh blood in there.  Americans are giving us that opportunity.  They've pushed us aside and are giving the other party a chance to get some things done.  Trust me, it won't be long before Americans realize that they're not particularly thrilled with what the other party is doing.  To the extent that Democrats can hold power for long, it will be precisely because they are being more "republican" than we have been.  The moment they begin to move toward the true Democrat Party core values, they will lose the favor of the American public.  And when that happens, it will be time to give Republicans another try.

The core values of the Republican Party are still the values that a majority of Americans identify with.  There will be a natural shake-up, as current Republican politicians retire or are voted out of office, and new ones who are more representative of our core values will take their place.  We will return to fiscal responsibility, strong defense, small government, conservative social values, etc.  Barack Obama ran on many of these values.  This is not the true Obama, of course, and it sure as heck isn't the true Democrat Party.  But it's what they needed to do to get elected.  If they stick to those values, then it may be some time before there is a shift back toward Republican power.  But then again, if the Democrats are truly promoting the same values that Republicans support, then does it really matter who's in power?

We don't need to change.  We just need to return to our roots.  Above all, we just need to purge the Republican Party of people who are in it for themselves.  Power and corruption got in the way of doing the people's business.  Most of the Republicans voted out of office deserved to be voted out of office.  These individuals have seriously damaged the people's trust in our party.  It's not that they don't agree with our values, it's that they just don't trust us.  I don't blame them.  We can restore that trust.  It won't happen overnight, but it must happen.  Because when the Democrats start pushing the country to the left, it is our responsibility to provide the opportunity for change that the people are going to be clamoring for.

As hard as it is to swallow, there may be some upsides to this Democratic power grab.  This is all theoretical, of course.  Actual results may very.

In general, conservatives are patriotic, and put the good of the country above partisan back-biting.  The liberal left, on the other hand, have done their best to tear the Republican-lead country down in an attempt to restore themselves to power.  For eight years, everything that has been done by the Bush administration or, when in power, the Republican congress, has been bashed by the left through their MSM megaphone.  Anything Bush did right has been ignored, while each of his mistakes has been used as a club to beat Republicans down.  And this, unfortunately, doesn't hurt only the Republican Party.  The collateral damage hurts this country.  When Democrats oppose our wars, they empower your enemies.  When they act to obstruct Republican policy, by obstructing, for example, reforms to Sallie Mae, they put our economy at risk.  So, to a large extent, if our country is not as well off as it was when George W. Bush took office, it is because Democrats have been working against it all of this time.

Now that they are in power, there will be unity.  It is one of my greatest irritations that Democrats are back-biting, bitter, partisan snipers as the minority, but when they recover the majority, suddenly there is a call for non-partisan unity.  But to a large extent, they will have it.  Republican politicians will continue to oppose their liberal policies, certainly.  But Republican citizens will support the Democrats as long as they consider them to be acting in the best interest of the country.  If, for example, Barack Obama chooses to continue the war in Afghanistan, he will be in a better position to do so than George W. Bush was, or John McCain would have been.  Because Republicans will support that effort, as they always would have, but Democrats will also support that effort, because it is their man leading the charge.  And this unity can be helpful to this country.  I hate with all my heart to reward Democrats for their anti-American partisan attacks over the last eight years, but if America can defeat its enemies and make some progress on serious domestic issues, I'm all for that.  Now, if I see the Democrats pushing this country too far to the left, then I and many conservatives will rebel.  As will many moderates, even Democrats.  We can't give them unchecked power.  We must watch them closely.  But there are many things that can be done to strengthen our country that both Democrats and Republicans can agree on.  And now that a Democrat is in office, maybe we will finally agree on them and start to move forward.

Then again, maybe Barack Obama will not govern as a moderate Democrat.  Maybe he'll govern as the far left liberal that he is.  If that is the case, this will be a LONG four years.

People are asking Barack, in victory, what will be his first priority.  What does he hope to accomplish first?  This is something that we, as conservatives, need to be asking ourselves in our defeat.

Some are claiming that the Republican Party is flawed, and that we must break it down to rebuild it.  This is, in fact, just what Democrats did when some broke off and, calling themselves "progressives", formed the New Party in 1995.  That core group is now driving the resurgent Democrat Party.  But I'm not convinced that we need to do something so drastic.  I'm convinced that the ideals of this party are still the ones most shared by the American people.  I think this election was a failure of our democracy more than a failure of our party.

The one indispensable pillar of a representative democracy is the free press.  How can Americans choose their leaders when we cannot truly know them?  It is the duty of a free press to shine the light of day on our government and our candidates.  They can claim to be whomever or whatever they want, but a healthy, unbiased press will expose the truth.  And armed with the truth, the American people will unerringly choose correctly.  It is tragic, then, that our press is no longer free.  If this is not corrected, it will lead inexorably to the demise of our democracy.  This is not an overstatement.

Our first priority, then, is to take back our press.  On another post, it was suggested that we need to rally around a moveon.org style website, a tool for mobilizing and focusing the powerful conservative base.  I suggested that such a site could be used to organize protests against big media.  By focusing our protests on one media outlet at a time, I believe we could send a very clear message that they cannot act as an advocate of one candidate or political party without alienating half of the population.  As a first measure, I propose that we organize a "sit out" during the next sweeps week, where we select one station, perhaps NBC, and direct every member of this group to avoid watching programs on that network (any of its stations, really).  As a secondary protest, for those willing, they could avoid these stations entirely until NBC cleans up its act.

Big media is not (yet) subsidized by the government.  They are part of the free market.  That means that we're the boss.  We can tell them what they can and cannot do.  We simply need to organize so that our voices can be heard, and they will have no option but to comply or fail.

Since the MSM and Obama's campaign are not waiting for the people's vote to be counted before calling this one for their man, I thought I might as well jump in.  With some newspapers already printing their "Obama Wins!" front page, and cartoonist Garry Trudeau inking his congratulatory cartoon to commemorate this "historic" Obama victory, I figure there's no shame in making my early prediction of a McCain "upset".

Polls this year, more than any previous year, have been used as propaganda to promote an Obama victory.  Every poll this year has come with the implied message "Don't waste your time!  It's a lost cause!  Obama will win!".  And in the end, that is the only way Obama could possibly win this campaign, if demoralized conservatives decide to stay home on election day, if they move beyond denial into acceptance of this grim reality of an Obama victory.  But I believe McCain has managed to convince people that this campaign is not a lost cause, and we have a very strong chance of winning this election.

Polls should be outlawed.  The only consequence of polling is that, prior to election day, one set of voters or the other will conclude that the election is lost, and decide not to bother casting their vote.  When this happens, when the poll result significantly drives the real result, the poll becomes the vote.  Why don't we simply select a random group of a few thousand voters nationwide and allow them to vote?  That is, in essence, what we're doing.  There should be only one poll, that on election day.  That's the only poll that has any bearing on reality and holds any weight.  And in that poll, I believe, once fully counted, John McCain will have a narrow lead and will become our next President of the United States.  I cannot believe that a true majority of Americans have been fooled by this charlatan.

Barack Obama, on the CBS "Early Show", stated that his biggest disappointment was how Republicans went after his wife, Michelle Obama, with negative attacks.  He said "I would have never considered or expected my allies to do something comparable to the spouse of an opponent".

Of course, his allies did that and much more to Cindy McCain.  Obama must be aware of the negative attacks on McCain's wife.  He must simply consider those attacks acceptable and deserved.  This has been Obama's attitude throughout this campaign.  He will whine about a partisan attack or negative ad, calling for "an end to divisiveness", while in the same breath spewing the worst kind of hatred toward Republicans and McCain.

To Obama and his campaign, an "end to political divisiveness" can mean only one thing.  An end to our ability to criticize and oppose him and his party.  Because criticism of them is negative and divisive, while criticism of us is perfectly acceptable.  I for one will never accept this man or his lackeys.  His "end of political divisiveness" is a slap in my face.  I can say with conviction that I will not accept this man as my president.  That he can seduce a small majority of American voters does not qualify him to be my president.  I will not forget the outright lies and hypocrisy that have allowed this man, if elected, to become the leader of this nation.  If he is elected, I will consider it an injustice.  And I don't think I am alone.

I wasn't going to bother posting my thoughts about the Obama propagandamercial that ran the other day.  But I just can't help myself.

When I watched this tribute to American despair, I found myself marveling at the choices made by the producers to demonstrate the hardships of ordinary working Americans.  In the first example, was I supposed to feel empathy that this mother, her husband, and their kids were forced to ration their SNACKS?  And in another example, as Obama talked about how difficult it was to afford the basics like groceries, this guy is at a restaurant paying for BARBECUE!  When the check-out guy rings up the total, he has his wallet out and a look on his face like he's in shock.  Ouch!  I can't afford to go to restaurants anymore.  Times are killing me!

And I'm going to just say it.  If you want to portray a family in need, they probably shouldn't be such a portly bunch.  I didn't get the sense that anyone was starving.

If Obama wanted to show the difficult lives of the poor, he should have shown us the true poor.  Not middle class Americans who are whining that they're not getting enough.  I believe this hurts their message more than helps it, because the VAST majority of Americans in that position are more appreciative of what they have than they are covetous of what they think they deserve.

It's funny, because my wife, after watching the ad, said she didn't get the point.  It just seemed to her like profiles of normal American people.  She didn't get this sense of suffering or despair at all.  She just saw normal people living normal lives.  I guess it's the old "glass is half empty" adage.  When my wife sees people like this, she sees what makes this country great.  Families living their lives, maybe struggling a little bit, but they have a roof over their heads, food on the table, and they have each other.  But Obama and the progressive Democrats see the glass as half empty.  They see what a tragedy it is that these families don't have more.  I don't think that they understand that true happiness isn't in how much you have.  If you have the basics, everything else is gravy.  True happiness comes from the PEOPLE in your life, not from the THINGS.  Middle-income Americans may be unhappy with their lives in this country, but what Obama has to offer will not provide that happiness.