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 1-20, 21-25 next last
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?")
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
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.)
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.)
To: wcdukenfield
Bttt
6
posted on
02/23/2004 7:11:40 AM PST
by
firewalk
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
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.
Comment #9 Removed by Moderator
To: wcdukenfield
hear, hear, Dr Levin
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
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.
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.
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.)
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
To: wcdukenfield; livius
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.)
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.)
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
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
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson