Apparently, Democrats' election wins mean victory for . . . conservatives?

[Cerridwen]

Molly Ivins is so fun to read. :D

AUSTIN, Texas -- It's time to give thanks, and I want to start off with a great, big thank you for the top American conservatives and all the fun we've had since Election Day. I know I promised not to gloat after this election was over, but I'm not talking unseemly gloating -- I'm talking about moments so brilliantly hilarious the only option is to put your head down on the desk and howl.First in line is the wit of The National Review's Kate O'Beirne, who clearly teamed up with Borat to explain the great conservative win. Her explanation is that this is a win for conservatism because a great many of the D's elected are so conservative themselves. She says half of them are conservatives.

She is indeed right. If only twice as many Democrats had been elected, it would have proved that there are twice as many conservatives in the country, and this is clear to any thinking person. We might challenge O'Beirne to explain how the next Republican win is a victory for liberalism.

The reason that O'Beirne and others are able to accept such an absurdity is because they've been listening to President Bush for six years and are thus able to believe six impossible things before breakfast.

Another moment

<snip>

more fun at link

edit: update link text

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Some local reader of the National Review has a LTTE in today's paper claiming

the same stuff. It was just an average change in the House and that all the new Democrats are really just conservatives....no need to look for any changes.

[Cerridwen]

3. Yeah, must be that "liberal" media promoting a conservative win...

/snark

[The Magistrate]

2. Ms. Ivins Is Quite Right, Ma'am

The idea the ekection results are a victory for "conservatives" is a poor exercise in comedy, and for three basic reasons.

First, that "moderate" Republicans were defeated in droves demonstrates the center of the polity has turned decidedly against the extreme right character of the Republican party, which these figures, whatever their personal merits, stood for in their eyes. The loss of 'moderates' leaves the Republican party an even more concentrated slurry of right-wing extremism, that will prove ever more offensive to the center of the political spectrum. Losses in New England and the Upper Midwest and the Southwest by the Republicans make it ever more obvious it is really a regional, Southern power, and for better or worse, the country can effectively be united against the South.

Second, in all instances where Democrats defeated incumbent Republicans, or Republicans running for open seats, the Democrat was perceptibly to the left of the defeated Republican. It does not matter that a number of these figures are not particularly far to the left pole of the Democratic Party spectrum: their victories represent collectively a noteable shift towards the left by voters in the center, and cannot honestly be viewed as endorsement of "conservatism" in any form.

Third, the new Democrats were elected by people who are fed to the teeth with Republican extremism, and the mismanaged cronyism and corruption it has displayed. The people expect the Democrats to fight this, not to reach some accommodation with it. We risk return to minority status only if we do the latter, and not the former.

[Cerridwen]

6. I, too, agree with her...

I do sometimes wonder, however, if people are actually moving "left," or if it's more a matter of people already on the "left" of the spectrum finally getting so fed up that they are taking the time to say so via the voting booth; whereas, perhaps in the past they either didn't vote or were less concerned over D vs. R?

Warning: Caffeine not yet in effect, post could sound muddled.

[The Magistrate]

9. That Probably Is A Part Of It, Ma'am

Because far from everyone votes here, in any election, the result is often a display of what persons are particularly moved to action, as well as of which are particularly discouraged and apathetic. It is never, ever, exactly the same electorate twice running. It is quite certain from the results that some people who have in the past not seen it as particularly important whether they voted for a Republican or a Democratic representative thought it important this year to vote for a Democrat, as many of the Republicans defeated had in the past received many votes from persons who had voted Democratic in other races on the ballot, and this year, they did not receive those votes. And it is quite likely that a number of persons of more left outlook shed earlier states of discouragement and apathy this year, being fired by the knowledge this really was a last-ditch situation that we had to win.

[bryant69]

4. I think that's one claim they are sticking to though

I guess i can understand why - it's a very useful fiction. Saves them from having to come to terms with their own unpopularity.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Cerridwen]

5. I'm sure they and others who would benefit from it...

will be more than happy to use the current spin of a "conservative win" to justify rightward on the political issues in coming legislative sessions and elections.

Naw, nevermind, "they'd" never be opportunist, would they?

:evilgrin:

[Greyhound]

7. Funny and sad.

:kick: & R

[zbdent]

8. Probably the only way to interpret the loss of control to Dems as a "win" for

conservatives is that they can sit back and blame everything bad that happens (they already have started, since 11/9/2006) solely on Democrats ...