Winner Talk

By the way, you should go back and read Bush's speech in MI from the previous post. It's good stuff, and more importantly, I think it's winning stuff. I don't know what's happening in individual races around the country, but I have the sense that one reason Republicans are struggling (besides the historical factors) is that they aren't pushing good judges and tax cuts enough. Rs don't win by feinting left, they win by articulating the reasons to vote right.


Voters find tax cuts irresistable, and yet I don't hear anyone talking about them. Here in MD, our Republican Gov. is struggling to win a second term, but I very much doubt he will. I say this based on no polls and no reading of experts but solely on his campaign ads. He's running on support for embryonic stem cell research and the environment in a desperate attempt to prove he's not Conservative. I don't expect him to trumpet his Republicanism in Maryland, but he apparently doesn't remember that what made him the first Republican Gov. in MD in a very long time was tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. If you're going to run on "liberal" issues, voters are going to vote for a real liberal, not a fake one. Last cycle he ran a robust campaign; this cycle he seems anemic. (Maybe that indicates the brains of the outfit was always Lt. Gov. Michael Steele?)

In all the heated talk about who's going to win Congress, I wish someone had analyzed what issues the "R" candidates were running on. Because Rs have a habit of feinting Left and running from their own best issues, with disastrous results. And Conservative pundits have a habit of fleeing their leaders when they appear unpopular (shall I list all the people savaging Bush from the Right at present who were around to savage Reagan, too?) I think I'll undertake that myself when the election is over. Who held his seat --the guy who stood with the Prez or the guy who ran from him?

Anyway, to the good stuff from Bush. We've covered judges (below). Then tax cuts (and remember, he's in MI, which has been in a perpetual cycle of job hurting for a decade):

The Democrats said the tax cuts would lead to a jobless recovery. You might remember that rhetoric. The truth is that our economy has added jobs for 37 months in a row, and since August of 2003, our economy has created more than 6.6 million new jobs. (Applause.) Oh, the Democrats said the tax cuts would cause the deficit to explode. Well, the truth is that the tax cuts led to economic growth, and that growth has helped send tax revenues soaring. As a result, we cut the deficit in half three years ahead of schedule. (Applause.)
And now the Democrats are telling you they're going to win on Election Day. But the truth is, if their electoral predictions are as reliable as their economic predictions -- (laughter) -- November 7th is going to be a good day for Michigan because Mike Bouchard is going to win the United States Senate. (Applause.)

Then he does his dozens of tax cuts the Dems opposed/ they must be secret admirers riff, followed by a discussion of tax cuts and small businesses, and the fact that the possible Dem chairman of the Ways & Means Committee couldn't name one tax cut he'd make permanent:

I want to tell you what that means. It means that if the child tax credit were cut in half, if these tax cuts aren't extended, if you're having breakfast with your family and you got one kid, your taxes go up $500 if they get control. Imagine having lunch with four children and the tax cuts don't get extended. That mother and father can rest assured that the Democrats will have caused their taxes to go up by $500 times four. That would be $2,000. That may not seem like a lot to the big spenders in Washington, D.C., but it's a lot to the people that work for a living. If you want to keep your taxes low, you vote for Mike Bouchard for the United States Senate. (Applause.)

Then the war rhetoric. In a sense it's boilerplate, but it's interesting how the argument gets crisper:

we face an enemy that knows no bounds of decency. They're ideologues, but they're ideologues of hate. They have taken a great religion and have twisted it to their evil intentions. They want to establish a caliphate, a governing structure, from Spain to Indonesia in which they're able to impose their dark vision on decent men and women. They want safe haven from which to launch attack against America again. They would like the wealth so they can develop weapons of mass destruction to use against us.
You cannot negotiate with these people. You cannot reason with these people. The best way to attack -- the best way to defend America is to go on the attack, stay on the attack, and bring the people to justice before they hurt us again. (Applause.)

There's that word reason again. And has he referred to the Caliphate before? And has he been this specific about their tactics before?

the stakes are high. It's important that we succeed. It's important that we understand there's an enemy that will kill innocent life so they can get their images on our TV screens because they believe it's just a matter of time before we leave before the job is done.

he goes on:

I want you to think about a world in which violent forms of extremists battle for power, a Middle East in which moderate governments have been toppled, a Middle East in which these extremists get a hold of oil and energy, and enable -- to enable them to blackmail the United States. Imagine the message: If you don't abandon your relationship with Israel, for example, we'll run the price of oil up to -- if you don't retreat to allow us to continue to expand our caliphate or governing structure, we'll run the oil up. Imagine Iran with a nuclear weapon 20 or 30 years from now. People would look back at this period of time and say, what happened to them?How come they couldn't see the threats to a generation of Americans who are growing up? Why weren't they able to see the dangers that persisted?
I see the dangers. I understand the stakes. Victory in Iraq is essential for the security of the United States of America. We will change our plans, we will adjust our tactics, but we will support our military. We will support this young democracy,and we will win in Iraq. (Applause.)

I don't know where he gets that 20-30 years. How about next year? Perhaps he meant think about 20-30 years from now if Iran gets a weapon today. Anyway. Then he hits Pelosi hard on her recent statement that Iraq isn't part of the war on terror.

Her position on Iraq would come as news to Osama bin Laden, who has proclaimed that the "third world war... is raging in Iraq." Her position would come as news to the number-two man of al Qaeda, Mr. Zawahiri, who has called the struggle in Iraq "the place for the greatest battle." Her position on Iraq would come as news to the terrorists from Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Sudan, Lybia, Yemen, and other countries who have come to Iraq to fight America and the coalition forces. Her position would come as news to the people of Iraq who have lost loved ones as a result of terrorist bombings and beheadings and brutal acts of terror. Her position would come as news to those brave men and women who wear the uniform of the United States of America who are risking their lives every day to protect the American people. (Applause.)
Her position that the war on terror -- see, she went on to say it's only in Afghanistan -- her position that the war on terror should be fought only in Afghanistan would come as news to the citizens of London and Madrid and Amman and Bali and Beslan and Riyadh and Istanbul and Casablanca, and other cities where the terrorists have murdered innocent men, women and children.
We need people in Washington, D.C. who understand the stakes of the world in which we live.

Then he ends with the long view, beginning with his dad:

He's an 18-year-old kid, the Japanese had attacked America. They killed more people on 9/11 than were killed at Pearl Harbor. And yet, he went, just like the kids who are signing up today. We've got unbelievable men and women who are saying, I understand the stakes, and I want to go defend my country as volunteers. That's what happened in World War II. And it was a bloody war and a lot of people lost their lives. It was a tough, tough fight.

And the son of this man who went off to fight a difficult war recently toured Graceland and consulted about peace with the leader of our former enemy.

Isn't it amazing? My dad fought the Japanese, and I'm talking about keeping the peace. Something happened between World War II and today, and what happened was Japan adopted a Japanese-style democracy. Democracies yield the peace. Liberty has got the capacity to transform an enemy into an ally. Liberty has got the capacity to transform regions of hopelessness to regions of light and hope. Some day an American President will be sitting down with duly elected leaders from the Middle East talking about keeping the peace, and our children and grandchildren will be better off for it.

You can't tell me that's not appealing to voters. Whether enough of them will hear it is another thing, but I'm sticking by my summer optimism.