One of the things we need to be careful of on the Republican side is that we don't fall into the same trap that the Democrats are currently storming into, for opposite reasons. While the Dems are falling apart and trying, apparently, to purge themselves of unbelievers in the face of failure, the Republicans run the risk of doing the exact same thing out of overconfidence in the face of victory.

The Arlen Specter affair is a perfect example of this tendency. While I am happy with the outcome, namely Specter getting the crap scared out of him and toeing the line, the actions of the Corner of National Review were the actions of a bunch of little kids who think that just because their parents squeaked out a pretty comprehensive win, it was time to start purging the ranks of unbelievers. This was the same group of people that panicked and almost imploded when the exit polls were leaning Kerry. The range of overreactions from that crowd, from total despair to gloating, is something that make me worry about those guys, no matter how funny Jonah Goldberg may be.

Let's not be a bunch of Trent Lotts. That jackass took the 2002 wins as a mandate for his kind of politics, including all the extreme-right-wing pandering he is so well known for. When he ran into trouble for that little birthday party thing for Strom Thurmond, I thought to myself 'Thank goodness he managed to blow himself up plenty of distance from an election year.' That fool had been capering around like a victorious Frenchman, manhandling anyone that didn't walk in lockstep with his views, and essentially acting like he was the architect and the reason for the comprehensive Republican victory, when in fact it's likely we won in spite of, instead of because of, him. He was a poor majority leader and a poor winner.

My (circuitious) point is this: The people who fought so hard to win this battle are not likely to be the ones that are eager to take the fruits of this victory and start treating it like a mandate to childishly start kicking infidels in the crotch. PLEASE, let's just sit back and watch the Democratic party sink without having to worry about the fire spreading on our own deck.

Fox, I completely disagree, and although I found your comment interesting I don't see how it relates to Brooks v. Newsmax. I don't think Newsmax was overconfident; they just missed the irony of Brooks' post.

I'm of the opinion that we inherited political capital in this election and we ought to spend it like a Saudi oil magnate visiting Vegas with two weeks to live. As for Specter, it's precisely because of the Corner's "overreaction" that we arrived at the outcome you approve of.

SD, I think the ball was rolling pretty much from the moment Specter shot his mouth off the day after the election. Frist was clearly going to scare the hell out of him, and the last thing we need is a bunch of me-tooers pushing too hard. You push hard enough, and Specter goes the way of Jeffords, with Snowe and Chaffee in tow. They keep saying the Republicans need nuance, and while I think that's BS on the international stage, it it certainly the case in congress.

Newsmax missed the irony of the comment, and instead of replying in a measured fashion, they basically pulled a Donald Sutherland-at-the-end-of-Body-Snatchers kind of reaction. This is not the time to burn witches. We won because our ideas are better and we keep our loonies in a closet. Let the loonies out, start preaching purity of membership, and you've got a Republican bloodbath to match or exceed the Congressional massacre of 1994.

Follow Rove. Always follow Rove. Is there any gloating from the Pres? Of course not. Is he preaching jihad against those who don't toe the line? No. He's quietly leading them where he wants them to go, and not with threats and shrieking.

You don't stay unified for the sake of staying unified, at the cost of principle, but we have to play this game like we just won the first half, not the whole shebang. It's the end of the first half, we're in the lead, and it's not time for the quarterback to bring up to the receiver that he really didn't like the way he looked at his girlfriend last weekend. No reactionary crap, please.

If all those Red-staters are missing out on sophisticated movies because they're home, er, natalising, that's got to be good for Republican demographics, so who cares whether Brooks was being ironic or whether Newsmax over-reacted?

Perhaps they confused the names David Brock with David Brooks. I know I have.

A fatuous whine about Red-State breeders would be very Brockish.