Prescription drug bill. No child left behind bill.
Posted on 11/04/2007 12:28:30 AM PDT by elhombrelibre
Largely unrealized and reported on this year, the West is actually on a roll against al Qaeda. They've been dealt a huge setback in Somalia by the Ethiopian military with US assistance; they're in their death throes in Iraq thanks to the surge, Iraqi tribes, and concerned local citizens; Lebanon's armed forces destroyed al Qaeda in its PLO refugee camps with relentless attacks. Musharraf is likely to use his emergency powers to eliminate al Qaeda in Pakistan, which will be part of his justification for his egotistical power grab. The Taliban is reported to be turning on al Qaeda and both of these two terror groups are losing huge numbers in any battles where they engage coalition forces in Afghanistan.
Keep up the good work those who are fighting them, and for those of us supporting freedom, we must keep up the struggle against those who want to aid the terrorists in any way.
My vanity post.
Amen FRiend, great post.
If anyone should have long ago turned on al Qaeda it was the Taliban. They would still be having their mass hanging in the old soccer stadium, if they had not let al Qaeda attack the US from Afgahn soil under their control.
Time to turn the gun sights on to the 800lb. gorilla: Iran and its minions (Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah, Sadr and his thugs, etc.)
If W pulls this off in Iraq, he'll go down in history as one of the best foreign leaders (and the worst Republican domestic spender) in American history.
Bush is going down in history as a second Reagan.
1. Tax cuts to spur on the economy.
2. A foreign policy success not generally recognized until he was out of office.
3. An inability to get Congress not to spend all the new cash flowing in and more partly because of needed military spending due to the prior Dim administration.
The key difference as far as I can see is that Reagan’s immigration reform passed and he did little to follow up enforcing the borders and Bush’s immigration reform failed and he followed up by stepping up border enforcement.
Here’s one for you...
What if someone told you that the U.S. military was going to take a hostile Arab country of nearly 30 million with a standing army of around a million men, take out its leaders and hold it for 4 years with less than 4,000 dead American solders?
The vast majority would say that it was impossible - including many in the military.
Now that it has actually been accomplished, it’s called a failure...
To my knowedge in the history of the world, that has never been done before.
Go figure...
“To my knowedge in the history of the world, that has never been done before.”
Yea and add to that we had Hussein hanged on the internet. When does THAT ever happen??
Awesome!
Um, that and negotiating with terrorists...I am a conserative to the core, but Ron was not perfect. Sorry to burst the bubble
Prescription drug bill. No child left behind bill.
Do you recall what exactly started him-Reagan-on that path?
Not actually true. I know it is Talk Radio Dogma but it is highly misleading. Federal Spending ALWAYS goes up. It doubled under Talk Radio's god, Ronald Reagan. Mandatory Entitlement spending sees to that even if you froze ever other part of the budget. Like it or not a President ultimately has only one tool in getting things done. Persuasion. The GOP Congress spending was the price Bush had to pay. Pretty tough for a President to veto his Congressional allies bills then expect them to back him on the things, like the war, he needs to do. The Democrats made a huge error in going into DC in raving Leftist moonbat mode. Since the Democrats have no intention of working with the President, he has nothing to lose now by simply vetoing everything they want to do. I know the Talk Radio generation likes to mythologies Reagan but even under Reagan Federal spending doubled. Why? Because our system is set up to insures Congress, not the Executive spends the money. The only time spending has even been marginally controlled is when the Republican Congress made some half hearted efforts to control it during the Clinton Regime. Unless Congress is willing to play ball, the Executive really has little power over spending. Vetos may make the spending hawks feel giddy but ultimately they don't do a whole lot unless enough of the Congress is willing to play ball and back the President up. All the Dems Leadership has to do is hand out a little of the pork to about 20-30 Republicans Congress critters and any Bush vetos on spending are just going to be overridden That is just the plan factual reality of how our system works. Bush The Big Spender? Check Again http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1916924/posts
One more failure... al-Qaeda’s recent stupid videos which accomplished nothing for them but a good laugh.
Yea, sure, old news, read all about it in WaPO and NYT and LAT....not.
Bush’s fault.
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.