OK Rep. Tom Cole, a former RNC executive director, is telling colleagues that Republicans can prevent losses in the 2006 midterm elections if they successfully define Democrats as carping critics who favor surrender in Iraq, higher taxes and more government spending.

In a memo he plans to send to House Republicans later today, Cole, who wants to join the caucus leadership next year as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, writes bluntly that Democrats could win seats in the House next November, and that "history suggests we face an uphill battle next year."

"I believe our voters respond best when they think everything is on the line -- and our House majority is on the line in each and every election that we fight," Cole writes.

Cole suggests stirring up "a little paranoia" among Republican base voters to motivate them to vote.

"I cannot make this point strongly enough. There are no inevitable victories in politics and complacency is the precursor of defeat."

Cole's prescription: Force Democrats "to defend the solutions they are offering to the American people -- higher taxes and bigger government at home combined with defeat and retreat abroad. Since they won't spell out their agenda to the American people we must do it for them."

[via Kos]

Nothing particularly new here, of course. Lying, misrepresenting, dissembling, appeals to prejudice and hatred, the flagrant use of hot-button wedge issues, mudslinging (as opposed to mudraking) and the muddying of waters and poisoning of wells -- these have all been tried-and-true Republican political methods for many decades. Others use them too, occasionally, but not with the consistency that the GOP does, and not with the same amount of glee.

Update: Hmmm. The "k" in "Republikan" in this post's title is a typo, but I sort of like it. It's got a Kafkaesque quality about it, and visually the "-kan" is reminiscent of the Klan. It may be a good choice to counter the GOP's many years of using "democrat" -- as in "Democrat Party" instead of the proper "Democratic Party" -- as a dig. Some folks I know like to use "Repuglicant" or other similar terms, but they've always seemed a little forced to me, while "Republikan" seems smoother and better focused.

I'll think about it, but it may be that I'll start referring to "Republikans" (like Bush, Cheney, DeLay, Lott, Santorum, Lieberman) and "Republicans" (such as Collins, Snowe, McCain) -- the determinant being not so much the politics, but adherence to dogma and "loyalty" (the Kool-Aid factor) and personal and political integrity.