Steyn ties it all in with a devestating column

On Hackett's and the "victory":

It was "nearly the biggest political upset in recent history," which is another
way of saying it was actually the smallest political non-upset in recent
history. Hackett was like a fast-forward rerun of the Kerry campaign. He was a
veteran of the Iraq war, but he was anti-war, but he made solemn dignified
patriotic commercials featuring respectful footage of President Bush and
artfully neglecting to mention the candidate was a Democrat, but in livelier
campaign venues he dismissed Bush as a "sonofabitch" and a "chicken hawk" who
was "un-American" for questioning his patriotism.

On the Democrat "platform":

...After the Ohio vote, Dem pollster Stan Greenberg declared that "one of the
biggest doubts about Democrats is that they don't stand for anything." That
might have passed muster two years ago. Alas, the party's real problem is that
increasingly there's no doubt whatsoever about it.

On Bush's education "cuts":

Just for the record, "his cuts to education funding" are cuts only in the sense
that Hackett's performance in the Ohio election was a tremendous victory: that's
to say, Bush's "cuts to education funding" are in fact an increase of roughly 50
percent in federal education funding.

And alas, a point that I've mentioned here before: the need for two parties in a two party system:

Republicans may see the increasingly arthritic, corpulent, wheezing, flatulent
Democratic Party as a boon for them, but I don't. Two-party systems need two
parties, not just for the health of the loser but for that of the winner, too.
Intellectually, philosophically, legislatively, it's hard to maintain the
discipline to keep yourself in shape when the other guy just lies around the
house all day.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Read the whole thing.