Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Reagan-Bush Doctrine - Why W. must be reelected.
National Review ^ | February 23, 2004 | Mark R. Levin

Posted on 02/23/2004 6:53:46 AM PST by wcdukenfield

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 02/23/2004 6:53:46 AM PST by wcdukenfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Howlin; onyx
PING
2 posted on 02/23/2004 6:54:41 AM PST by Mo1 (" Do you want a president who injects poison into his skull for vanity?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Excellent article.

To a great extent, I think that Bush really couldn't waste time "engaging" the Dems until now - for one thing, he had a war to fight (a real one, not just a political one). Secondly, the Dems didn't really have a single spokesperson until now, but were busy conducting their shadow warfare through the press. If a President wastes his time on this, he's going to have precious little left over for the business of governing.

I think that the time has probably arrived for the attack, but one thing I would really like to see is more defense of the President's policies from other Republicans. Why weren't the Republican Senators and Reps coming out and smacking down their lying, hateful "colleagues," and having press conferences every day to support the President.

One of the things about the Rats is that they often run away when challenged, since they know they are lying through their teeth on just about everything. But if nobody challenges them, they are strenghthened.
3 posted on 02/23/2004 7:01:39 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield; holdonnow
Great read, Thanks for posting it
4 posted on 02/23/2004 7:02:14 AM PST by MJY1288 (There's no leaders on the path of least resistance, ask John Kerry, he's been paving it for 32 yrs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield
Ding, ding, ding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
5 posted on 02/23/2004 7:06:54 AM PST by DoctorMichael (Thats my story, and I'm sticking to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield
Bttt
6 posted on 02/23/2004 7:11:40 AM PST by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield
It's about time that we took the gloves off...where's the 21st Century version of Lee Atwater...we really need him.
7 posted on 02/23/2004 7:16:20 AM PST by MarkDel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Ever notice the Dems/Libs cannot win a debate on the issues. They have to resort to personal attacks and other scurrilous means to try to undermine their political opponents.
8 posted on 02/23/2004 7:21:55 AM PST by treeclimber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: wcdukenfield
hear, hear, Dr Levin
10 posted on 02/23/2004 7:30:18 AM PST by barkingdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
take the gloves off???naw... lets use clubs on the RATS!
11 posted on 02/23/2004 7:30:47 AM PST by rrrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: wcdukenfield
The President has always maintained that he had no problem with the Democrats making "political" attacks on him. What he failed to appreciate is that the "political" attacks were never just about Mr. Bush. The Democrats' attacks also diminished the accomplishments of our soldiers, questioned the operational and tactical decisions of our commanders in the field (remember the "quagmire" and "flak vest" controversies), and were clearly an attempt to demoralize our troops and drive a wedge between them and their Commander in Chief for partisan gain. Along with a lot of other bogus presumptions and "conventional wisdom", the "New Tone" should have gone with the wind post-9/11. During WW II, FDR would have chewed up and spat out the Republicans if they had behaved as disgracefully as the Democrats have behaved in the War on Terror.
13 posted on 02/23/2004 7:32:46 AM PST by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius
To a great extent, I think that Bush really couldn't waste time "engaging" the Dems until now - for one thing, he had a war to fight (a real one, not just a political one).

But the "new tone in Washington" was a campaign promise, and it was GWB's philosophy as soon as he took office, nine months before 911. He used it as his umbrella under which he implemented his massive spending increases, with zero vetoes, just as he did in Texas. If foreign policy is his great success, the "new tone" has been an equal failure.

14 posted on 02/23/2004 7:35:25 AM PST by Moonman62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield; holdonnow
Isn't Bush best when expectations are lowered? Was the Meet the Press interview political gamesmanship revving the left up for their ultimate demise?

The Bush/Rove political strategies are either brilliant or inept. I happen to believe the former to be the case. The campaign is a long process.
15 posted on 02/23/2004 7:37:11 AM PST by marktuoni (This space reserved for pithy comments...as yet I have none.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield
I am all for the president presenting his case to the public. As a practical matter, though, I don't think we should do anything to weaken Kerry until he has the nomination in the bag, and its too late for anyone else to come forward.

Kerry is too perfect an opponent, we don't want to mess this up for ourselves by shooting back too soon. Taking Kerry apart, and watching him implode, is going to be too much fun to miss. I want to be able to savor the moment.
16 posted on 02/23/2004 7:58:41 AM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield; livius
"Call it preemption. Call it self-defense. Call it liberation."

Call it what it is, A Grand Strategy Of Transformation.

17 posted on 02/23/2004 8:04:57 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Unless the world is made safe for Democracy, Democracy won't be safe in the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Wallace
**PING**
18 posted on 02/23/2004 8:06:44 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Unless the world is made safe for Democracy, Democracy won't be safe in the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
Being polite to Dems never pays off. They consider it weakness.
19 posted on 02/23/2004 8:36:35 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Absolutely the truth. Probably the first creative idea to come out of the White House since - well, since Reagan.
20 posted on 02/23/2004 8:38:41 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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