He alone can wake us up out of a our sleepwalk towards catastrophe in this election.
Do you have a better suggestion for the role?
Posted on 06/02/2007 2:56:40 AM PDT by lancer256
I agree. What happens is going to be enormously important to the future of this country.
You have got to be kidding. The big gummit program, anti-business, pro-minimum wage conservatives have been calling President Bush every name in the book and he addresses them and they are hurt?? How ironic is that?
One question, where do you get the Manuel Labor if you deport all the Mexicans??
Pray for W and Our Troops
One of the first hints of Bush’s unseemly hostility toward the conservative base was when he referred to the Minutemen as “vigilantes”.
“Bush just wants Mexicans in the US. He likes them and wants them to be happy.”
I agree that’s part of it, maybe a lot of whole of it. I think there are a lot of interests at work here, and we are only being told a little bit of the truth. And like you, I think the “why” is irrelevant. But the fact of the matter is that this lack of border security is an egregious dereliction of Presidential duty. The federal government has an obligation to repel invasions and provide for the common defense. Instead we have gangbangers, drug runners, the Ft. Dix terrorists and the Mexican army wandering back and forth across the border at will.
Can you imagine FDR refusing to fight the Germans in World War II because he liked bratwurst and lederhosen and had fond memories of his Nanny Helga growing up? That’s essentially what Bush has chosen to do. He’s not going to uphold his Constitutional obligation because he personally doesn’t feel like it.
In that sense he still is the immature frat boy, the consummate self-absorbed, narcissistic Baby Boomer. It’s all about him, him, him, him, him, him, HIM and his personal preferences, and the best interests of the rest of us be damned.
I, too, am Christian first. My family values are based on that, and, hence are not independent of it. Thus cannot be ranked, other than as ‘derivative’ of my Christian faith.
The same goes for my ‘conservative’ values. They are based on my faith in Christ. If someone could convince me, using only the Bible, that Jesus wanted me to steal from others to fund my compassion, that Jesus wanted to see millions of infant souls slaughtered before they had ever drawn breathe, that Jesus was against punishing the wicked, that Jesus not just forgave, but actually encouraged sexual activity outside of marriage, particularly promiscuous medically dangerous activities between people having the same equipment, then I would joyfully be a liberal, too.
But He doesn’t, and the progressives know it. The whole progressive experience is a rebellion against God’s Law.
However, not all Christians are actually Christian. And of those that are, not all of them follow the logical consequences to the end. Among this later group, I include GWB. And, indeed, myself. None of us have reached perfection.
But when the error creeps over into politics, it’s necessary to correct it. Not that I know God’s Will on immigration. My own thought is that we should be kind to the stranger, but we don't have to let him move in with us.
Gingrich? Surely you jest.
“I believe the George Bush’s Christian faith sincerely compels him toward an abhorrence of racism, or sexism, or religious bigotry.”
Why then, is Mexico and illegals from Mexico treated with a red carpet rolled out....and illegals from ALL other countries immediately deported?
GWB does not treat all illegals the same, far from it.
Asians and those of European lineage are treated as the bottom of the barrel.
The GOP is total toast if they continue down the road of liberal-globalism.
Unless the GOP selects one of the non Media-Darling candidates running, 2008 for the GOP will be like what the Conservatives in Canada suffered in 1993...or the Whigs about 150 yrs ago.
The biggest fear for the GOP is that a third-party conservative runs. The old whine of “taking votes away from the GOP” or “wasting votes” wont float as a criticsm in 2008.
The Left gets what it wants as soon as the status of the 12 to 20 million illegals is legalized, i.e., when the President signs the bill. Once that is done, we have crossed the Rubicon. Any other “difficiencies” in the bill will be corrected by the Dems in subsequent Congresses.
bttt
He alone can wake us up out of a our sleepwalk towards catastrophe in this election.
Do you have a better suggestion for the role?
Gingrich has always been squishy in the middle. Nothing’s changed in that regard. He craves liberal approval too much to be anything but a hindrance to the advancement of conservatism. His vaunted “ideas” are mostly watered-down Dem goals with a Republican smiley-face painted on them to make them palatable to conservatives.
Boy, did you get that right!
bump
Oh, I have some ideas. I have my own reasons for not sharing them here at this time.
>>After reading this thread, and all the psycho-analyzing that is being done, I gotta say that the explanation for Bush’s actions, as with most people, is usually much simpler.
__________________________________________________
Exactly. Bush just wants his way. He really has no loyalty to the United States as an actual geographic place - which it most obviously, is.
Most of the major players see global government as inevitable. The border, in their minds, are going to go away eventually, so why fight it?
Globalism is the point.
The first step will be an economic union of geographic regions, that is what we are seeing now, and Jorge is not going to let the American people get in the way of that!
I have previously compared Gingrich to Churchill, quite aware that I court criticism for putting him in that league. But I do so Because Gingrich is a walking idea factory who can think outside the box. As one of Churchill's generals said of him (words to the effect) "he has a hundred ideas a day one of which might be good." God knows, Neville Chamberlain and the Tories wanted no part of Churchill but had no choice. Stalin did not want to recall Zhukov, but the Nazis were at the gates of Moscow.
The liberal barbarians are at our gate.
Newt’s “ideas” are shallow, and his “solutions” are trite. Looking to him to lead a conservative revolution at this point would be like looking to Bill Clinton to lead a crusade for chastity.
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.