Posted on 02/13/2006 9:50:57 AM PST by presidio9
Thanks. :-)
I don't have a problem with shutting down Agriculture or HHS.
BTW did you know that the President is trying to 'outsource
bureaucrat jobs? ;-) I didn't remember until you mentioned shutting down mindless departments. I think this would be great as it would end a lot of red tape.
Over the last five years, Bush hasn't behaved like a conservative. Creating a massive prescription drug benefit, increasing funds for the NEA, nationalizing airport security, creating the largest govt department since 1947, signing the anti free speech McCain-Feingold CFR into law, supporting McCain's torture bill, advancing backdoor amnesty for illegals, supporting affirmative action before the Supreme Court, signing off on huge farm, energy, and transportation bills and doubling the Education budget. These aren't signs of a conservative POTUS at work.
Sure you do. Get your Reagan history right and stop lying.
The US Marines were part of a multinational peackeeping force, that was thrown into the middle of a civil war in Beruit Lebanon. After the Marine barracks was car bombed, US intelligence was unable to determine for certain, who committed the action. Some experts in the US govt believed the responsibile party was Hezbollah, with help from either Syria or Iran. Islamic Jihad actually took credit for the bombing, but no one took that claim seriosuly. No final determination was ever reached by our government on this matter.
The Reagan administration did hatch a plan to knock off a military barracks of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Defense Secretary Cap Weinberger opposed such action. Weinberger told Reagan, any attack without positive proof of who committed the Beirut action would lead to an expanded civil war, dragging the US further into the conflict and undermining Reagan's efforts to win the Cold War.
Until this day, Weinberger insists the responsible party is unknown. Reagan did order air bombing and shelling from the USS New Jersey. Soon afterwards, the Marines were pulled out for good. All in all, a smart move. Reagan knew that Beirut and all of Lebanon was an untenable situation. Besides, Reagan had bigger fish to fry.
It's easy to look back with 20/20 hindsight and say Reagan was negligent for his lack of action. Fact is, if Reagan was given proof posiitve who committed the killing of the Marines, he would have taken stronger military action then he did.
I would like to see this start in HHS as I think that Defense has enough on its plate right now. For example, welfare checks could be outsourced to Ceridien and ADP.
Good post. Thank you.
His judgement certainly wasn't. - By his own statement.
Which is, plain and simple, a vote for Hillary.
Face it, unless he dies, McCain is the next GOP POTUS candidate.
Just as Hillary is the next dem.
Well, OK. Who's your man for president in '08?
McCain will steamroller any other candidate.
Face it guys, McCain is unbeatable in the primary.
BTW, when he cruises to the GOP victory, please don't elect Hillary by not voting.
Right now I don't have a candidate for 2008. Its still early. George Allen is worth a look. I'd like to see Bill Owens get in the race. After all is said and done, we might have John McCain to contend with. We shall see. Just no Giuliani. Liberal Republicans need not apply.
The govt is growing so fast because of social security.
Without fixing that spending will continue to grow.
"Face it guys, McCain is unbeatable in the primary.
"
??? His unfavorable ratings among Republican voters are very high and a lot of prominant conservatives really don't like him. I think he'd do very well in a general election but I think his chances of ever making it out of the GOP primary are very slim indeed.
Bruce Bartlett has a regular column in the Washington Times. I used to read his commentary, until I decided that he was just not on the same wavelength as my political outlook. Nothing the Bush Admin did was enough for him. He joined Georgie Ann Geyer & Pat Buchanan on my list of "do not waste time reading."
You mean if he (the lib president) tried to kill our enemies, cut taxes, tried to fix social security, and expressed his love of Christianity I'd be outraged?
Show us the quote where Bush says he loves big government. I'm not happy about increased spending either, but I doubt Bush loves big government. He has more faith than I do that government can fix problems. But that doesn't make him a lover of big government.
I'd have to agree. McCain-hating conservatives on this forum and elsewhere have little idea how popular McCain is with the apolitical or independent segment of the voter population. Even my Republican-hating liberal daughter-in-law likes him. I myself am not real fond of him except for his stand on defense...which counts mightily. Any conservative Republican who would not vote for McCain because he's far less conservative than Dubya is just cutting off OUR!!! collective noses to spite their face.
It's funny how so many "conservative" columnists slam someone who is far more conservative than any Democrat. You'd think there would be one thing they'd agree with Bush on. That's where these people make their mistakes. They simply go too far in their criticism. It would be fun to go back and reread these Bush critics columns over the last five years or more to see how accurate their predictions have been.
I'm not happy about growing deficits, but the problem can be fixed a lot more readily than defeating Islamo-fascist terrorism. Remember we have close to a three trillion dollar annual budget. Anyone who says that we can't cut ten percent or more of fat from that is just smoking rope.
Rebel in Chief is a good guide to understanding the President's conservatism, which doesn't suit many on this forum.
Some of them have put Reagan on such a pedestal, they have almost deified him. While he was a great guy and president, they would have been equally critical of him.
I am a Bushbot also, but I know he's not perfect. I also know he's a great president, probably the best one we could possibly have had for the times we are in.
But you can't please some of the people ANY of the time.
I would add no McCain. He worries me more than just about anyone. I agree on Giuliani.
I'll watch for Allen. Other than him I don't see a good solid conservative candidate. Of course, I'll settle for someone who is at least willing to fight. But no real fighters have emerged, either.
Maybe its early yet.
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.