Skip to comments.Is 2008 The New 1964?
Posted on 08/07/2007 12:04:46 PM PDT by CenTexConfederate
click here to read article
And that might just be a good policy to follow in our current war. Bomb Sadr City, bomb the Triangle of Death, bomb Iran's nuclear facilities and their one refinery, and bomb the homes and offices of teh Mad Mullahs in Teheran. Watch the terrorism shrink very fast.
It'sa better plan than slogging through the job slowly for God only knows how many years.
Perhaps that is the way in which Iraq does resemble Vietnam. We need to get eh politicians out of the way and let the military win the darn war. Otherwise, we shouldn't be wasting all these lives and all this time and treasure.
FYI: nakedly imbecilic crap such as this is precisely why descriptions such as "stormfrontcandidate" are allowed as keywords on Paulestinian threads.
You're solely responsible for your own brand name image in the marketplace of ideas, ultimately.
I agree with that. Is there soem specific form a declaration of war is supposed to take? Does authorizing the use of force to defeat a specified enemy constitute a declaration of war? It certainly authorizes something that looks, sounds, feels, and smells like a war.
As I state whenever someone bring up this ridiculous phrase: "let's think about this for a moment - a group of farmers, lawyers, and businessmen sign their names to an open declaration of treason against the Crown, which controls the largest empire and the most powerful military the world has ever seen, and whose punishment for treason is generally death, and it's *NOT* a suicide pact?! I just love that one. Had the revolution turned out the way that any logically thinking person would have expected (it certainly hadn't completely succeeded just yet - see: War of 1812), every man whose name appeared on that Constitution would have been executed to serve as an example of what happens to traitors. These men put liberty far above their personal safety in the face of nearly certain death - but hey, it's not a suicide pact or anything."
Ron Paul is a wild shrimp by comparison.
No better, RON PAUL IS A COWARD. This wimp will NEVER get my vote.
I personally do not think he is presidential material and while I may agree with him on some issues, his battered spouse-syndrome regarding Islamofascists and his total lack of leadership experience lead me to continue to support him staying in Congress rather than being our parties nominee.
(My most polite post ever on FR.)
And that intel was correct, as Iraq's own documents show. Read Stephen Hayes's The connection.
Iraq's own documents also show that they did have WMDs. I am convinced that that is why the libs were so adamant about keeping Israel from invading syria. Tehy know the WMDs were moved there and they live in mortal fear that the Israelis, beingcompetent, would find them.
They-just-can’t-help-letting-it-slip-out PING. ;)
I think you’re confusing the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence.
Which, of couse, would explain why his people were negotiating with Al Qaeda's people about cooperation, not to mention why our troops found a document in the headquarters of Iraqi intelligence listing one "Osama bin Laden" adn an operative of their Damascus bureau.
Which, of couse, would explain why his people were negotiating with Al Qaeda's people about cooperation, not to mention why our troops found a document in the headquarters of Iraqi intelligence listing one "Osama bin Laden" as an operative of their Damascus bureau.
Goldwater gave the Republicans the character to repudiate FDR’s New Deal. His inner circle of people like Karl Hess to Clarence Manion. It is like 1964 again when I was 10yrs old walking neighborhoods with my Mother for Goldwater. Ron Paul Karl Hess Clarence Manion.
Five GOP Presidents after Goldwater's campaign did you get what you wanted? Did America repudiate FDR's New Deal anymore than it did before?
The Anti-Paul people are just being realistic about where the country is, how it works, and what it wants. Goldwater's message is bound to come back someday, but will America ever do what Goldwater wanted?
Maybe a major crisis comes around and people support major changes, but that happens at most once in a generation.
As was I, with my oversize button that said, "If I Were 21, I'd Vote for Barry." Goldwater is one of my early heroes. I remember standing up in school to defend him and explain why I was supporting him. And the porr, publicly-educated teacher just sat there with his mouth open, unable to figure out how a kid coudl make an articulate case, since he was so convinced that Goldwater was evil.
I love freaking liberals. All these years later,it's still among the most fun things I know. And as an old debater, I love to leave tehm sputtering.
Good book recommendation, Vic Gold’s “Invasion of the Party Snatchers” Gold is Goldwater’s Press Secretary from 1964 and is also very close friends with George and Barbara Bush.
It’s a quote from another FReeper. See my profile page for the direct info. But I think the idea still stands. Someone else said it best:
The Constitution *IS* a suicide pact. Our elected officials swear an oath to uphold and protect it. Not for our flag, any State, or our Nation, but the US Constitution.
Only very, very slightly, if at all.
As someone once explained it, with the Democrats in charge it's like you're driving off a cliff at 100 miles per hour. At least the Republicans drive the speed limit. But they're still going off the cliff. What we need to do is turn the car around.
Yes, when the liberal welfare/police state completely collapses, we'll rediscover his principles in the ruins. What the conservative movement is about, or supposed to be about, is to lead us back to those principles without having to go through the ruination.
But as a wise man once said, if you're goign through Hell, keep going.