Posted on 03/23/2006 11:00:54 AM PST by WBL 1952
Edited on 03/23/2006 11:59:57 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
As you well know, this is a conservative website and not a GOP website. Granted, not quite as conservative as it once was, FR remains a great place to advance traditional American values and beliefs. I come to Free Republic to advance political conservatism, not Bushism. I do not blindly follow everything Bush does.
In the last year Bush has lost his majority support among Americans. From a conservative persepctive, this has a lot to do with his liberal domestic policy agenda and poor White House PR/communications effort. While I still stand with the CIC and his efforts in the WOT, that doesn't stop me from criticizing Bush when he's wrong. I believe in excercising my right to free speech and political dissent on all issues. That includes, the Bush Presidency.
As ususal, you're never satisfied with anwsers that don't tow the Bush line. Well, TOO BAD! The fact that some other folks believe as you do, is of no concern to me.
Conservatives all agree. There needs to be a greater emphasis on getting control of federal spending, limiting government expansion and properly addressing immigration reform. Ignoring these issues isn't healthy conservative politics. I consider these issues paramount to the future of the conservative movement and to the GOP holding power.
This isn't at all about defending President Bush; it is about attacking the media for their bias, which covers not only how they cover President Bush, but the Catholic Church, stay-at-home moms, Republican conservatives in Congress, gay rights, and the Supreme Court.
Why NOT expose the bias of the media? Why not use this story (not as important as some) to continue to keep the issue of media bias in the public eye?
And if you support the War on Terror and the President in his Commander-in-Chief role, perhaps you should consider that media coverage of the war has been VERY skewed and is hampering the prosecution of the war.
And why aren't you on the murdered pastor thread telling people that this isn't an issue we should be discussing on FR? I mean, that doesn't have to do with immigration reform or out-of-control spending, either.
Nope. You only show up on threads in which people are defending the President or discussing him in a positive manner. It seems to me that your interest is NOT in discussing conservative issues UNLESS you can use those issues to attack the President.
And I am not going to apologize for supporting the President, nor am I going to allow you to cow me with your continues inferences and insults.
Personal attacks get you nowhere other than minority status and the backbench. You've made my point for me quite well.
Arguing with Freepers is hardly "advancing the conservative movement." It's called infighting. Like any movement, infighting divides, it doesn't conquer. By definition, expansive movements must EXPAND their audience, not whittle it down.
And, for the record, 1000s of meaningless posts really are a net negative for the forum. That's not aimed at you, as I noted you actually seem to engage in discussion. Far too many "regulars" on this forum flood the servers with nonsense. Jim has been concerned about this for years now. As a longtime FR, if you were to be honest you'd have to agree that the content of the discourse here has dwindled. "Serious debates on FR?" Ah. Surely you jest. I'd rather expend energy affecting the lost, not pissing off fellow conservatives. Which leads back to Maples' unanswered questions.
Are you really Pat Buchanan, Reagan Man? Perhaps I'll cull that out by asking how you feel about Jews. Any thoughts on them?
You are very right. I don't know you. I do know your posts are just a bit overaggressive and antagonistic for someone claiming others are so ignorant.
Every one has biases...it's not what he privately thinks that bothers me...it is the fiction that the presentation of what goes out on the air is so biased.
Think what you like ABC, but present facts to the public, even the ones that don't fit your script...report the news and stop trying to socially engineer our society...if you what to do that, run for office.
Our democracy depends on an independent and free press, and you are playing a role in weakening our democratic institutions when you do not report both sides to a story, or when you fail to report important stories that you wish to bury...s
Some of my Russian friends stated that before the fall of Communism they had to read Pravda in two ways...they read what is in the publication, and they looked for what was not in the publication that one would expect to see.
It is appalling that my conservative American friends now watche the alphabet networks and read the liberal american newspapers in exactly the same way Soviet dissidents used to read Pravda to try to discern the truth.
Stick to you role as new reporters, and I think you will be pleasantly surprised at the reaction of the public...they will appreciate it.
As usual, you don't want any discussion of Bush`s failings. Period. So be as outraged and upset as you want to be. Makes no diffrence to me. Btw, if this article was about Mike Pence, I'd reach the same conclusion.
I've known the media to have a liberal bias for 40 years. Nixon didn't handle the media very well and he paid the ultimate price in the end. Reagan was a master of handling the media most of the time, and it paid off for him in the long run. All President's have the Bully Pulpit and its a major tool for getting their message out to the American people. The Bush administration believes ignoring the media is the way to go. LOL I call that a prescription for failure. Frankly, Bush&Company have done the worst job of getting their message out to America, then any administration in my lifetime. And that starts with Ike.
>>>>Are you really Pat Buchanan, Reagan Man? Perhaps I'll cull that out by asking how you feel about Jews. Any thoughts on them?
Not only are you an ignorant juvenile, you're an arrogant race baiter, too boot. Carry on.
I am expecting you to start commenting on other threads that aren't discussing the important issues that you profess to care about.
If I don't see you telling others that their stories are also unimportant, I believe I will have my answer.
Yep...Give the good news, the bad news and the in between news. If they are going to be a 24/7 shill for the DNC at least have a disclaimer.
I think it is Bush's fault! /*scarcasm off
Reagan wasn't exactly the brightest bulb on the tree...in fact, he may have been the dimmest. But I cut him some slack since his "profession" was an actor.
That is the same lame attack on Reagan you liberals have been throwing around for the last 40 years. The historic facts of the Reagan record show something entirely different.
President Reagan won the Cold War, dismantled the Soviet Empire and the communist Eastern Bloc, freeing 500 million people from totalitarian rule, rebuilt the US military, revived the US economy from the worst conditions since the Great Depression, cut taxes 25% across the board, reduced the top tax rates from 70% to 28%, reduced welfare state and non-defense discreationary spending, and reduced federal regulations like no POTUS before or since. Reagan also proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative, aka.STAR WARS. A visionary proposal that brought Gorbachev to his knees. Reagan also negotiated reductions in the strategic nuclear weaponry of the worlds two super powers. Reagan should have won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in ending the Cold War.
Lets not forget the results of Reagan's two landslide victories in 1980 and 1984. In 1980 Reagan beat Carter by 9.7%, 50.7% to 41%, and 489 electoral votes to 49. In 1984, Reagan beat Mondale by an 18.3% margin, 58.8% to 40.5%, and with an historic high of 525 electoral votes, to 13 for Fritz.
Finally. If it wasn't for President Ronald Reagan there would be no conservative movement today, no Newt Gingrich and the Contract With America, and no 43rd President called GW Bush.
I'm going to play a hunch and say "Green, John R."
"That is the same lame attack on Reagan you liberals have been throwing around for the last 40 years. "
Um, I am not a liberal. I just call them as I see them. However, after your rude response, I need to modify my comment and say Reagan was not the dimmest bulb...he has now improved to second dimmest.
Right, mister liberal. Carry on.
"Right, mister liberal. Carry on."
OK, since you insist...were you dropped as a child? Or maybe as an adult? Just curious. I find you very entertaining.
Lets review. First you regurgitate a 40 year old insult of Reagan, that only a liberal would find useful. Then you whine about getting called a liberal, as you fling a rhetorical booger at me. Finally, you ask two pathetic questions, and announce you find me entertaining. LOL We need an amber type alert for your kind. You sound like an escapee from an asylum for habitual simpletons.
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.