Posted on 07/24/2005 10:32:28 AM PDT by radar101
There's a difference between those who engage themselves in politics to advance ideals they believe in their hearts and those who engage themselves in politics as a sort of high-stakes game of chess covered by 24-hour news.
Some FReepers/political enthusiasts start out as the first category and end up as the second category. For them, it become all about "the game" and winning at any cost. It becomes about pandering to voters rather than standing by ideals that aren't necessary popular. They just want to "beat" the Democrats by chalking up votes even if it means changing core conservative policy rather than by simply better communicating those core policies.
Admittedly, it's an easy thing to get caught up in, as we play election math and count up electoral votes. I myself have thought things before such as, "Congressman So-and-So is one sharp cookie. He'd be great Pres. material if only he wasn't from a 'low electoral count' state." Similarly, there are some worthless Congressmen that are on the G.O.P. side that we keep electing because we don't want a democrat to win or because they've got some level of seniority, and if we're in his district, we don't want to "lose" that to another district.
Thankfully, I've never been asked by Republicans to "be a backdrop" for a political candidate just so hispanics who are watching can see someone hispanic can be seen in the background. However, I wouldn't hold it past the quisling contingent to do so if they thought it could give them a "leg up" in "the game."
Sorry I neglected to ping you. I'll try to do better next time.
Then, according to GWBush's thinking, loyal American conservatives are "vigilantes".
History will NOT be kind to this President.
Also, did you catch the new approved set of words the White House has decided are to replace "War on Terror"? Something like "violent extremism" in place of "terrorist violence". Amazing. Political correctness strikes again (along with "new tone in Washington" and "compassionate conservatism").
It's amazing that the compassionate conservative kool-aid drinkers think this is good for America!
"Though only opinion....
I think 2008 is going to be all about immigration. Single issue. That's what will drive the next election cycle.
Bush is screwing up big time."
Bush isnt running in 2008
Bush has been overly successful with immigration.
It's time Bush places IMMIGRATION REFORM on the To Do List
I know bush isn't running in 2008. That wasn't my point, sorry if it came off that way.
IMHO Immigration will be *the* issue that people vote on in 2008.
Bush *right now* Is screwing up big time.
It looks like that is exactly what is going to happen.
I understand now why the Bushes and Clintons have become so chummy lately.
The fix is in for 2008.
Yes, but how many do you employ?
I think we all know that the reference is to the KKK.
Bayourod loves to use that one.
Bookmarking your #72 post:
bayourod quote:
"If I had my personal preference, instead of Mexican laborers, we would have Western European laborers with blond hair and blue eyes pouring across our borders bringing their beautiful daughters. But that isn't reality. Neither is "sealing the border".
To recognize that Republicans must not unnecessarily alienate Hispanic voters with gratuitous insults if we hope to keep Hillary out of the White House is not the same as saying that I want to invite them to live in my house."~ Bayourod (post #72)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1449544/posts?page=72#72
(Bayourod quote)
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.