Posted on 09/15/2005 4:52:29 PM PDT by Howlin
Edited on 09/15/2005 5:05:17 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I think he is a wonderful man. A great president. I believe in him AND his mission. :)
Your limited capacity does not allow you to see analogies or points being made within an overall context.
And why will they and the others will not? Are you saying laws will be broken? Your points have no point.
Your explanation, though lengthy, does nothing to further your point because I, too, have always known that conservatives are far more compassionate than liberals in that we want people to succeed and prosper, and have the satisfaction of the accomplishment. It is no reason for offense.........the root of which must be elsewhere.
For whatever reason you have chosen to be upset by the term 'compassionate conservative,' to me, it is a complete waste of emotional energy.
There are so many serious problems in this world, Miss Adams. So many things to be angry about..........the murder of millions of innocent pre-born babies, the erosion of morals in our culture, the pursuit by the left of taking away our freedoms, to name just a few...........that I am both puzzled and bemused by those of you who divert the strength of conservatism by being angry at those of us who share your goals, but don't dot every 'i' in the same way you do.
As I read through post after post of angry people who hate George W. Bush (I don't know if you're one or not), there is very little, if anything, to distinguish the anger and hostility of the far right from the anger and hostility of the left. Part of the reason that it is so easy for leftist trolls to survive on FR, is that they can mimic the extremists here, say the same words about the President (and mean them), and not necessarily be detected.
History will judge this President, and though it is impossible to know what the future will hold, I believe that he will be judged as having protected this country from terror, freed millions of people from brutality and revolutionized the Middle East, and of having started the move back to the right in this country, morally, fiscally and most importantly judicially. He will have done as much, or more for conservatism than Ronald Reagan (who was also reviled by the far right during his presidency, but now, mysteriously is worshiped by those same people).
If FR is still around in 2050, and I have a computer at the home (I'll be over 100), we can have this debate in hindsight................and I will have been right.
I see Bush being socially conservative on one issue...abortion. I don't see providing massive handouts as being good for society in general. Now that Bush is committing billions of handouts to residents displaced by the hurrican, where's the incentive to better yourself. There will always be another government handout. For far too many they have made a career of depending on the government. GWB keeps the tradition continuing.
However, I much agree with the rest of your post. Please read my reply #2853.
I reiterate, it is far more than a term. It is a harmful concept and practice of governance which will breed more citizens like the looters, robbers and helpless victims we watched in New Orleans. President Bush has used the term to justify and perpetuate useless, wasteful and destructive government welfare-like programs and to rationalize the further growth of government.
For ten years, I worked with people who were the failed products of the welfare state. I walked through some of the poorest and most dangerous neighborhoods in America, and came to know some of them and their familes rather well. Most were individuals with potential and dreams BUT FOR government programs, would have been realized.
"W's" "compassionate conservatism" will continue to further the hapless and wanton destruction of the lives of many such Americans. Opposing the continuation of such ruinous government policies is a waste of emotional energy??? I think not. Only an irrational mind would offer such ludicrous advice.
A great number of matters are currently of great societal importance. I have worked hard and sacrificed much for many of them since my university days, including pro-life issues. I will choose what, when, where, how and why I choose to address or expend energy on various issues without the flawed, biased, arrogant and self righteous judgement of blind persons like you.
You do NOT have to lecture me on the evils of the welfare state. I am a conservative, and have opposed it my entire life. But what was proposed in this speech was NOT welfare. It was a helping hand for those who had lost everything...... to get started, to start businesses, to get jobs, to succeed on their own, quite possibly for the first time in their lives. It was an MBA speech proposing solutions to problems that have existed for over 60 years........and knowing this President's track record, I'm betting that it will work.
I will choose what, when, where, how and why I choose to address or expend energy on various issues without the flawed, biased, arrogant and self righteous judgement of blind persons like you.
And just because you have lost an argument based on ideas, doesn't mean you have to get nasty.
The sure sign of losing the battle is when you start throwing out mindless insults as you just did, when the person you are discussing the issues with has been polite.
Sorry, Miss Adams, but this conversation is over. (And I'll remember that you can't deal with controversy without name calling, and avoid engaging in the battle of ideas with you in the future).
Good day.
There was nothing in that post to elicit such anger and derision from you.
Please read it again and reconsider what you said to me, and I will reconsider what I now think of you....
Something you didn't intend to say does not equal no personal barbs or offensive remarks. Sorry. Reread your posts. It was you who began the lecturing.
I dislike the "Bush Hating" as much as you do. And among the Bush supporters (a group to which I belong), are the "Bush Lovers" (your screen name says it all) who can't stomach ANY honest and genuine criticism of President Bush and thus can be almost as annoying.
Unlike Ronald Reagan, President Bush believes in big government and big spending and his concept of "compassionate conservatism" is directly tied to his failure to curb big government. When I first made the point, it was you who chose to argue it, even though you too are dissatisfied with his lack of effort in this area.
You have expressed your opinions every bit as strongly as I have expressed mine. Because I clearly understand you have just as much a right to do so as do I, I would never suggest your so doing implies a belief we are on opposing sides. Yet you proceeded, and quite wrongly, to make that implication (that I argue as if we are on different sides) regarding me.
I defended my point for three reasons: because I believe it to be true; because it is important for the survival of this country to decrease the size and scope of government and because it is important to point out not only when Liberals fail in this regard but when conservatives do so as well.
Your originally charged me with hypersensitivity regarding President Bush's use of the term,"compassionate conservatism." I have correlated the president's belief in his brand of conservatism, "compassionate conservatism," to his failure not only to shrink big government but to grow it. It is you who are guilty of hypersensitivity - to any disagreement with President Bush expressed by another poster, no matter how well intentioned or regardless of sincerity.
Sorry, T. You called me "flawed, biased, arrogant, self-righteous" and "blind."
Without an apology, the conversation is over.....permanently.
Knowing how absolutely devoid of character you think I am (see above), why do you care what I think anyway? Your opinion of me is so low that it would be foolish for me to presume that anything I said would mean anything to you, so I see no reason to bother.
Conversation over.
Unfortunately they have a completely incompetent Mayor and a weeping, incompetent and deceitful Governor.
I'd say they've got themselves a problem....
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.