Posted on 05/22/2006 6:16:18 PM PDT by M. Thatcher
"Yes or no answer please: On September 12, 2001, did it ever even cross your mind that we would go over four and a half years without getting hit again?"
Yes or no. Did it ever occur to you On September 12, 2001 that our border would be left open to an invasion of terrorists, thieves, and welfare scrounges?
The prosecution of the WOT by itself is worth having him around.
Second...to point out just one area, he's the best pro-lifer we've had in office since Roe vs. Wade. Even better than Reagan. But then, we even have pro-lifers on this board who want to treat him like Satan.
To your paras:
No, it's not at all asinine! The "BS meter" is in fact raging on posts such as yours, not mine. Reagan faced the Cold War which had been going on for decades and knew how to defeat it. He didn't allow communists to fester within our nation. Bush has done a great job, phenominal in fact, led by military members as it should be, in Iraq and Afghanistan! But he's been absolutely pathetic here at home.
He's created an entire department with a name suggesting that it targets the same goals here at home, yet sees most of its funding going towards things utterly unrelated to even basic safety let alone terror safety and protection from terrorism. He doesn't appear to care who crosses our southern border.
Lincoln as well knew the threat to the nation but also didn't leave the back door open and executed the plan to success. Bush seems more concerned that Iraq and Afghanistan become a democracies than whether or not the United States continues to remain a viable Republic!
To para 2: It's a real shame that we're only doing a fraction of that prosecution of the WOT here at home, eh! Or perhaps your plans are to move to Iraq at some point?
At this rate there may be no nation to protect in 25 years. Do you honestly believe that if we have 150 millioin Mexicans and other foreigners actually living within the CONUS that our nation won't become some sort of socialist mecca? Please! Spare us both.
To para 3: He's been a great pro-lifer. But you know, at last check abortions were still legal in all 50 states! Or am I missing something.
Talk about a one-issue stance in a tug-o-war that isn't budging! Meanwhile, will it even matter whether this nation is pro life or not if we're overrun by Mexicans and the soon to be influx of other people from nations around the world that will be using Mexico as a "gateway to the US?" Or don't your sensibilities allow you to see that that's coming?
Probably wouldn't have cottoned to them very well.
Still doesn't get GWB an invite to the big table with Reagan, Washington, Jefferson, and Madison.
...McCain and GWB would've both though been reprimanded by Thomas J for their parts in establishing the CFR charade.
I do not, sir, because these comments do not apply to me personally. 'Twas only venting steam. :O)
IF you consider liberlism and his liberlism that great, then boo hooie for you dude. I am not impressed.
On my honor, I say the following: If you answer my question first, I will answer yours in an honest and straightforward manner.
Let's see if you can do the same.
But it's not reality, and meanwhile your purity of "principle" makes it easier for Democrats to gain power. that's a sucker game. If you ewant party discipline, make it stick in the primaries and support the guys in the House instead of throwing your vote in the trash.
They were nowhere near the same scale, the Al Qaida connections are dubious or non-existent and they were all situations that were virtually impossible to detect with the intel apparatus that has been preventing the larger attacks. 9/11 was like Pearl Harbor redux; the attacks you've named here would not even be remarkable if the perps had not been Muslims and had instead been "lone nut" types. In fact, it should give you pause that we have only been hit a few times by these individuals in four and a half years; despite my endorsement of the president's security performance, I've been expecting waves of suicide bombers since about the time I realized Al Qaida was having trouble pulling off big time ops in the U.S.
We're getting hit on a daily basis in Iraq as well; I don't necessarily agree with taking so narrow a view as to say that just because we've outsourced terrorist targets to Iraq and that it is military personnel that are bearing the brunt of it, that we aren't getting hit.
I say the following as a veteran: It's as much our job to do the dying as it is our job to do the killing. Nobody would ever have said FDR was a failure because Nazis were killing U.S. troops on the fields of Normandy instead of killing civilians in New Jersey. We went somewhere that the enemy used for training, harbor and funding. If that costs us lives that is the nature of war, and the warriors are professional volunteers who know exactly what they're getting into.
Lastly, you know I wasn't asking about some idiot driving an SUV into something or Marines getting killed on a battlefield when I asked my question. Let's try again: On september 12, 2001, did you think wee'd go four and a half years without Al Qaida launching another mass casualty attack on our soil? I know I expected them to hit us again in days or weeks.
Sure you don't. I'm sure Will Pitt wasn't bluffing either...
Well, if anybody said Dubya was as good as Washington and Madison, they're nuts. But they're not any less nuts than people who are willing to throw him under the bus right now.
Fair enough!
Oh, I'm sorry, I made the mistake of thinking someone who served in the Army long enough to retire would be smart enough to grasp a subtle point. Actually, that wasn't even a subtle point, so that makes it even more sad that you didn't get it.
Lincoln expanded the federal government and you can find plenty of Freepers who'll tell you he killed federalism and might as well have been a Democrat. TR expanded the federal government even more and made our foreign policy much more interventionist. Both of them in their time had detractors just like you who focused on one failing or another and couldn't see that they were good men doing a good job. And they were great. So is Dubya. And someday, the prattle of people like you will look as silly as the prattle of those who called Lincoln "the original gorilla" and other such names.
tThe fact remains that considering his job performance without 9/11 and the WOT is like considering Reagan without the Cold War, FDR without WWII, or Lincoln without the Civil War. For eaxmple, if one considers Reagan without the Cold War, there's some tax hikes and amnesty to deal with...but only an idiot would boil Reagan down to that.
But he's been absolutely pathetic here at home.
You're pegging the BS meter again. Go back and read the article, and tell me all those domestic decisions are "pathetic."
It's a real shame that we're only doing a fraction of that prosecution of the WOT here at home, eh! Or perhaps your plans are to move to Iraq at some point?
Um...are you aware we've gone four and a half years without a terror attack on our soil?
Do you honestly believe that if we have 150 millioin Mexicans and other foreigners actually living within the CONUS that our nation won't become some sort of socialist mecca?
I honestly believe my point was that his performance overall is very good. Sell your "immigration is not what it should be therefore he's a bad president" story somewhere else. In fact, while you're at it, let me know what any other president since Eisenhower has done to improve the immigration situation.
He's been a great pro-lifer. But you know, at last check abortions were still legal in all 50 states! Or am I missing something.
Oh, do you have a suggestion for what the Prez could do to outlaw abortion tomorrow? I'd love to hear it! I'd also love to hear where you think the abortion debate will be in 50 years if we can't get constructionists through the Senate because people like you handed the Congress to the Dems on a silver platter.
Instead of regaling us with stories of the fortunes you're going to spend defending your honor from charges of insanity (not a little too worked up over that at all, are you?) why don't you give us some evidence that you have some small measure of guts and answer the following question:
Yes or no: On September 12, 2001, did it ever even cross your mind that we would go over four and a half years without getting hit again? (Note, if you think that wording is a trick, you can feel free to answer this question instead: Did you think we'd even go a year before being hit again?)
Just wear a hat that says "Administration Talking Points" on it, would ya. LOL
I really don't feel like even reasoning with you anymore. I have no idea where you're drawing some of these notions from implying my positions, but it ain't me.
You're a perfect case-in-point as to what's wrong with our entire system. Your utterly one-dimensional reasoning and narrowmindedness have reduced you to a stooge.
I'm mystified..where did I imply any position on your part in post 675? most of my post is questions, not descriptions of what you supposedly believe.
As for being a stooge and not wanting to reason with me...Seeing that, especailly after I asked you to cite some of those "pathetic" domestic failures, makes me think of the phrase "Declare victory and withdraw." I think this is more about you reaching for the ejection handle than anything else, but if it floats your boat...
Yes'm...
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.