Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: jessduntno

“Where do you limp dycks come from? You awill not be on the short list for the Winston Churchill award this year, pal.”

If a real Winston Churchill arises, I’ll support him or her wholeheartedly. I don’t see one, and please don’t tell me Palin. Look at Alaska. What did she accomplish there to reduce that state’s dependence on government?


52 posted on 03/22/2010 8:42:30 AM PDT by quesney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]


To: quesney

“If a real Winston Churchill arises, I’ll support him or her wholeheartedly.”

Roll over then and present your posterior for the gratification of the socialists...I won’t be joining you.


53 posted on 03/22/2010 8:45:23 AM PDT by jessduntno (Obama in complete control of your health care and mine. What could possibly go wrong?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: quesney

Someone said very wisely on another thread last night (wish I could remember where?) that a leader is born in the grassroots, did the politician start the Boston Tea Party? Somewhere along those lines, Im looking for quote.


55 posted on 03/22/2010 8:47:22 AM PDT by GoCards ("We eat therefore we hunt...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: quesney
If a real Winston Churchill arises, I’ll support him or her wholeheartedly.

Good Gawd!

Why don't you grow a spine, you candyass lemming!

Instead of handwringing and whining and waiting for a leader that you can FOLLOW, why don't you STAND UP FOR CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES and FIGHT!

Caps on purpose...

57 posted on 03/22/2010 8:48:09 AM PDT by Flycatcher (God speaks to us, through the supernal lightness of birds, in a special type of poetry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: quesney
If a real Winston Churchill arises, I’ll support him or her wholeheartedly. I don’t see one, and please don’t tell me Palin. Look at Alaska. What did she accomplish there to reduce that state’s dependence on government?

I see the lessons of 2006 and 2008 still have not sunk in with the 100%er crowd. Only God is perfect. Nothing of men ever is. Demanding perfect purity in Politics is a sure prescription for political irrelevance. This is why the Libertarian wing of the Conservative movement has been so completely ineffective for the last 20 years. This is why you people always lose to the RINOS.

You all keep wasting all your time making the perfect the enemy of the good. You are so busying spending all your time worrying about the dogmatic purity in your political allies your never have any time, or energy left to fight the Leftists on anything. You are so busy factionalizing your political base into competing interest groups, you have nothing left to ever fight the progressives. No wonder they continually kick the your asses in election after election.

As one famous Conservative leader said " A man who agrees with me 80% of the time is a trusted friend and ally, not a 20% traitor"

Curious what these sort of ideological purist would of said about a President who presided over a worse recession then this current one, appointed a Liberal to the Supreme Court, Raised taxes 6 times, doubled the size of the Fed Budget in 8 years. Spent, prior to this regime, record deficits. Ran away from a Muslim terrorist threat. Signed an illegal Alien Amnesty. Lost control of the US Senate to the Democrats on his watch.

What would you say about that? Using the sort of purist dogma exposed on this thread, and every other possible thread daily, I suspect, you would be screaming "RINO" at that former President and assigning him to rank down there with Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, U.S. Grant, and Warren Harding as one of America’s worst Presidents because he did not pass their personal ideological purity test.

-

-

-

-

-

That President was Ronald Reagan. Probably the greatest President of the 20th Century.

Reagan had words for your sort of ideological 100%er.

By Ronald Reagan in his autobiography An American Life

“When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn’t like it. “Compromise” was a dirty word to them and they wouldn’t face the fact that we couldn’t get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don’t get it all, some said, don’t take anything. I’d learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: ‘I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.’ If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that’s what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.”

60 posted on 03/22/2010 8:49:46 AM PDT by MNJohnnie ("The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples' money" Lady Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: quesney
and please don’t tell me Palin. Look at Alaska. What did she accomplish there to reduce that state’s dependence on government?

Are you aware that most of the government dole in Alaska is natives getting payoffs from the government for land? That deal was struck long before Palin came into play. Besides the natives probably figure the government owes them. Who knows. Anyway they have been getting Indian checks for a long time.

67 posted on 03/22/2010 8:55:32 AM PDT by beckysueb (January 20, 2013. When Obama becomes just a skidmark on the panties of American history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson