Orson Scott Card, with a view from the left

I've read a few of Orson Scott Card's sci-fi short stories. He's a decent author (not among my favorites), but he's a Democrat.
On the other hand, he's a Democrat with a clear-eyed view of the foreign policy stakes in this election:

There is only one issue in this election that will matter five or ten years from now, and that's the War on Terror.

And the success of the War on Terror now teeters on the fulcrum of this election.

If control of the House passes into Democratic hands, there are enough withdraw-on-a-timetable Democrats in positions of prominence that it will not only seem to be a victory for our enemies, it will be one.

Unfortunately, the opposite is not the case -- if the Republican Party remains in control of both houses of Congress there is no guarantee that the outcome of the present war will be favorable for us or anyone else.

But at least there will be a chance.

I say this as a Democrat, for whom the Republican domination of government threatens many values that I hold to be important to America's role as a light among nations.

But there are no values that matter to me that will not be gravely endangered if we lose this war. And since the Democratic Party seems hellbent on losing it -- and in the most damaging possible way -- I have no choice but to advocate that my party be kept from getting its hands on the reins of national power, until it proves itself once again to be capable of recognizing our core national interests instead of its own temporary partisan advantages.

(The Ornery American)

Hat tip to Rush Limbaugh, who pointed out Scott's piece during his radio program today. Rush also mentioned a roughly parallel opinion expressed by Michael Kinsley (once to the left of Pat Buchanan on CNN's "Crossfire").

The Iraq was is the big issue of this election because of the role it plays in the war over the ideological future of the planet. Read the whole (long) article.

It's still possible that the Republicans can wage the war over and against the obstructions of the Democrats--it may even be possible that the Democrats are insincere in advancing the "phased redeployment" suggestions that Kinsley rightly characterizes as euphemisms for defeat.