Posted on 09/22/2004 5:32:31 AM PDT by Dazedcat
But can we at least agree that we have no Conservative candidate to vote for in November?
candidates for the two major parties have gradually converged to the point where they are almost identical in their outlook and political philosophy. If nothing else, this makes for dull, boring campaigns over inconsequential issues.
---
DO WHAT? How can you say that the Democratic Party and the Republican party have the same views? Do you believe that abortion is an inconsequential issue? How about protecting this country?
Well, you just described the Islamist worldview to a fare-thee-well...
How about this? Bush is fighting a war on which the very survival of this country rests. This is not some banana republic police action, this war, if lost could doom this country. Imagine a nuclear bomb in New York city. Under the circumstance, practically every other issue becomes secondary, and Bush trades in all kinds of political chits to move the country forward on that issue alone. He can compromise anything else just about in order to keep everyone together for the battle. Kerry's response to 9/11 would have been a few more cruise missles, some protests at the UN, and then threats to chase down the terrorists. Bush did was we should have done the first time the WTC was attacked, he took it to them. I don't need to know anymore than that.
This is not a flame, just something I think people who want a perfect conservative in the White House ought to consider.
Unfortunately, "undiluted socialism" will make certain that the sheeple get to choose only once... To get rid of it you'd need a civil war.
"I would like nothing better than to see the US return to the Monroe/T Roosevelt doctine and begin over the coming years to extricate ourselves from the rest of the world and concentrate on the western hemisphere. No matter who we elect in the next 50 years that will not happen."
It's negative thinking like that which will ensure it won't happen. Buck up!
"Yes he is the lesser of evils you might say, but he is much much ... much lesser than the alternative"
Conservatism has a dialectic of its own. A people cannot become truly conservative unless they have an oppresive liberalism (i.e. socialism) to react against. Change comes through this contradiciton. I believe Hegel called it "heightening the contradictions". Or as that great philosopher Steve Miller put it" "you have to go through hell before you get to Heaven."
If possible both Teddy and FDR would be rolling over in their graves if they are seeing the gradualism that has taken place in American politics.
This thread perpetuates a self indulgent bent from the few percent of Republicans who did not get the memo.
It Does Not Have To Be All About You.
Why would you want to condemn your family and neighbors and friends to life under the opposition? Why? Don't obfuscate and talk about who failed what. Just decide if you want your kids to grow up under the opposition.
Well, that's true to some extent, but wouldn't a true "suicide bomber" be someone who straps a body to himself and goes out and stands alone in a field and says, "If you don't do what I want, I'll blow myself up"?
"To get rid of it you'd need a civil war"
And that's a problem because ...
Seriously it's all part of the dialectic. Since the libs don't believe in guns, the "civl war" you fear would be mercifully short and in our favor. Maybe we can stop that pendulum from swinging left once and for all.
the problem with "homicide bomber" is that it is pure propaganda AND it does not fully describe the signified.
A "homicide bomber" doesn't have to commit suicide.
Tim McVeigh was a "homicide bomber"
Eric Rudolph was a "homicide bomber"
"suicide bomber" conveys the fact that the bomber killed themselves too...
if one committed suicide by blowing one's self up without killing anyone else, then one would be someone that "committed suicide."
"homicide bomber" is just a discursive trick by those that want to somehow make "suicide bomber" even worse...
It is really strange when ostensibly conservative people play the same sorts of post-modern word games that they claim to oppose amongst left wingers.
"suicide bomber" is the proper way to refer to terrorists that blow themselves up and take others with them.
Your confusion about this presidential election betrays you --- AT BEST --- as an emotionally immature relativist. This makes you a potential danger to our Constitution in its present form.
One thing wrong with this and what I read in your earlier post. World history has demonstrated that once a nation descends into socialism it is an abyss from which there is no bloodless escape. Why do you think the democrats push gun control so hard. To keep us safe? No, once we are disarmed thay can have their way with us. As for socialism, to quote Lenin "The purpose of socialism is communism".
I'm sure the good folk of Charleston, SC thought the same in 1861. I'm sure the good folk of Beirut thought the same in 1975.
If you want to live in a country undergoing a civil war, please pick one (there is no shortage) and emigrate.
As long as America's political system is what it is....and we are forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, I will take the lesser every time....with the hope that the lesser will take more time to destroy us...and in the mean time we may be able to find someone to lead us who is a lesser evil than the former lesser evil.
check later
Excuse, I think the Weekly Standard is dead on target when it comes to what we are facing. I hold the paleocons likebuchanan in equal contempt with the pacifist left.
We're at war - and I'd rather fight the thungs over there than fight them in our schoolyards and shopping malls.
"once a nation descends into socialism it is an abyss from which there is no bloodless escape"
1954 just called. It wants that sentence back.
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.