Posted on 11/27/2007 10:25:19 PM PST by smoothsailing
The Gore thing in 2000 was the US equivalent of the Sammara mosque bombing - you knew right then that gloves were coming off and things were going to get real ugly.
NAFTA was lauded by many Republicans, as was welfare reform. Also, aside from the timing, I don't recall anyone saying that Clinton should not have bombed Saddam Hussein.
I think we have given Clinton credit for these things. But Bush, even if he utterly toed the liberal line for the rest of his term, would not get credit for anything.
Sounds like my lib friends. They’re insane. I just can’t talk sense into some of them and as a result have stopped talking with a couple.
Yes, but the liberal arguments are irrational. Selected, not elected, how childish is that? When every re-counter in the country couldn’t get Gore elected. There was nothing stolen, when you discount what the liberals were trying to do, steal the 2000 election using the legal system and blocking votes from being counted.
In fact liberals use the legal system to try and steal every election they think they can, look at the Washing ton Governors race.
What liberals talk about others doing is very likely what they ARE doing. Not hard t see through them, they just still think the media can hide it.
With good reason.
That is true, with one fact you've overlooked. Liberals have control of the pursestrings, the language, the media, and the culture.
It's not an even playing field. Not even close.
And, no, I do not want to hold hands and sing Kumbayah with liberals. Liberalism is an infantile mental disorder.
Most comments on FR regarding Carter refer to him being an ineffectual doof, not (like the Bush haters) comments accusing him of murder, torture, swindling, draft-dodging, etc.
As for Johnson or FDR, I don't recall any hatriolics outside of people who feel the Democratic policies have nearly ruined America.
As for Hillary or the Slickster, much of the hatriolic criticism stems from their proven treatment of numerous women, their admitted hijacking of FBI files, their policies of demonizing the wealthy while THEY fudge every rule they can in order to become wealthy.
In short, the Clinton's personal lifestyles...their pushing of the gay agenda, anti-faithful, etc..... is WAAY more insulting and intrusive to the average American than anything Reagan, or Eisenhower, or GWB ever did.
Can't explain it, but I feel the Clintons have consciously singled themselves out to be 'superior' to all us noodniks.
Prominent among them was the cartoonist Jules Feiffer, who published a cartoon showing one of his trademark wimpy liberals saying, “Reagan said the Berlin Wall would come down, and I said Reagan was a fool.” Each panel featured yet another statement by Reagan answered with the same refrain, until we reach the last: “Because if Reagan was right all along... ... then what kind of fool am I?”)
Anybody have a link or can post that cartoon?
But they do say something worth quoting once in a while, don't they?
A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to kiss ass" - Paul Begala on pandering
If he actually said that, at least it's funny and a jab at himself coming from a Hillary ass kisser.
I too have a liberal friend, she has been (has been) a good friend for over a decade. We would often be able to discuss issues of the day with reasonable discourse. I have sadly watched that ability devolve over the last 4 years to the point that I avoid her.
So deluded has she become that she called me on Thanksgiving eve to invite me to lunch on Thanksgiving Day! Confused, I explained I would be spending it with my family and thanking God for His blessings. I was told it wasn’t it religious holiday. I reminded her Washington established it as a day to Thank God. She didn’t know anything about that...! Ugh!
The brainwashing seems nearly complete, IMHO. There is no talking to her.
A lot of the vitriol seems to be misogynistic in nature. It’s nothing new either and is directed at members of both parties.
Hillary Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, Laura Bush, Barbara Bush, the Bush twins, Nancy Reagan, Amy Carter, Nixon and Johnson’s daughters, Bess and Margaret Truman, Eleanor Roosevelt. It’s about how they look and I’m sure it goes back farther than that.
It could be argued that the adults mentioned above are fair game and I am as guilty as anyone of participating in it at times but 11 year old Chelsea Clinton should have been immune from personal attacks about how she looked, as well as the other children and teens mentioned.
When I look at a picture of Hillary Clinton what I see is a rather average looking woman in her mid or late 50s but that doesn’t stop me from joining in the “ugly Hillary” talk. Maybe what I need to do is click my own screen name before joining in, to remind myself that I no raving beauty either and confine my remarks to her hated socialist policies.
I just opened myself up to personal attack by letting everyone know that there is a picture of me at my “about” page and though I may be fair game because of my remarks, my family members also pictured have said or done nothing to offend anyone here.
Great article by J.R. Dunn. Thanks for posting.
Watch when Hillary is defeated. Socialist heads will explode.
Run Hillarious Run!
When I look at my high school yearbooks I am struck by how my view of people's appearance is affected by their personalities. There were a number of girls I found attractive in high school that now look quite ordinary. There were also some very attractive people who I found unappealing because of their demeanor.
Hillary reminds me of an aunt whom I detest. I see in her a self-serving and deceptive individual who seeks only her own benefit. Hillary's personality and her "cankles" make her quite unattractive.
OK, I’ll give you some deregulation.
Camp David, though, is still pretty specious. The Soviets are gone, and it wasn’t because of Camp David. All Camp David did was give Sadat some cover from Arab radicals for stopping attacks on Israel, which he wanted to do anyway after being defeated so soundly in ‘73. Long term, it didn’t do him much good, on that front.
They and their media then started a campaign to de-legitimize President Bush, saying he STOLE the election, knowing it was a lie.
They then began accusing him of lying to go to war, being cold hearted and sinister enough to kill soldiers for his own political and financial gain. He, the VP and staff have been drug thru the mud and been slandered as corrupt, evil, have been investigated and thrown in jail by rogue CIA officers.
The Dims in Congress and our Intell agencies have leaked intell to their MSM sabotage our war efforts, have aided, abetted and comforted the enemy in two war theaters, leading to God knows what on the battlefield for our soldiers.
No, calling them vampires who suck the lifeblood out of their country everyday does not dehumanize them at all, they admittedly call their actions a proud "dissent", and they have proved everyday that they are no longer the loyal opposition, but an enemy to the Untied States.
Wait a minute! Clinton has gotten his due. Most would credit him with NAFTA and Welfare Reform (he signed it). He has also been recognized -- for better or for worse -- as a consumate politician.
Carter? I frankly can't recall anything positive emerging from the Carter administration. He'll be remembered for 25% inflation and "malaise", little else.
Try as I might, I can't think of anything positive about the LBJ administration, either. He did a royal job of screwing it up -- Viet Nam, War on Poverty, consolidation of the Social Security and General Funds. He earns credit for some important civil rights legislation. But, by his own admission, it was crassly motivated -- to lock up the black vote for the Democrats for a generation.
FDR won a war, for cryin' out loud. He gets credit for that.
And I notice you didn't mention Harry S Truman -- who is as respected on this board as Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller.
By and large, there is more respect expressed on this board for Democrat figures than you would find on any liberal board for Republican figures.
The fact of the matter is, the last three Democrat presidents been either deeply corrupt or nincompoops. Sometimes both. Plus, their most recent candidates, Al Gore and John Kerry, would've fitted right in with that description.
Scarier still when it's your own family.
Facts have no impact on them. A polite political discussion is simply impossible.
It is as if challenging their hatred of Bush and Republicans challenges their faith in liberalism. And that is like challenging a serious Christian's belief in God.
It's irrational.
However, we now know that Begin and Sadat had arrived at the agreement themselves, well in advance of Camp David.
They contacted Carter to oversee the agreement so as to gain the U.S. endorsement and guarantee of the agreement.
Carter played the role of host. And got to claim a role in front of the cameras. Nothing more.
No elected Republican was undermining their country and helping the enemy for a hatred of Clinton.
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.