Skip to comments.Breaking Up Is Hard to Do ("Bush Destroyed the Republican Party" -- Drudge Headline)
Posted on 01/26/2008 5:57:27 AM PST by fightinJAG
click here to read article
Do you mean that Republican primary voters became so uninformed that they nominated poor almost non-Republican candidates?
What Peggy Noonan has written here is little different from what Phyllis Schlafly has been saying and documenting for years now.
I heard her on O’Reilly last night (with Laura Ingraham). I really didn’t agree with much I heard her say. Basically she kept saying, “I was wrong, and it is hard to say that”, and she felt one of Bush’s addresses was way too “aggressive”. But she didn’t define how.
Laura, in essence didn’t contradict her but did say the Congress was full of Republicans to share the blame.
Rush had it right. He said in the beginning of this whole thing, when we had both houses and the presidency, that if we sit back and cease to educate we will lose it all.
GW Bush had the ‘Coach’ Hastert Republican Congress and never ever vetoed any of their spending.
Phyllis Schlafly said that George Bush destroyed the Republican party? Well in that case, I disagree with Phyllis Schlafly AND Peggy Noonan.
You said it for me.
I quit giving money to the RNS 6 months before the election whee the Dems rained control of both houses. The GOP asked for it. It was led from the inside by the RINOS.
Going for more coffee
We're spoiled. We want instant gratification and we want it NOW, and anyone who doesn't give it to us NOW, will REALLY be sorry because we'll hold our votes until we're blue in the face.
If we can't have a wall, we refuse to compromise and build a fence.
If we can only get a couple of hundred miles of fence at a time, we refuse to vote for those incrementally trying to get that fence built.
If we can't have a candidate who's "conservative enough" and President Bush campaigned as a moderate with very conservative values about some issues, then we must self flagellate at the alter of "pure conservatism" by voting Democrat.
It was "conservatives" voting "the bums out" that got us a Democrat controlled House and Senate, where NOTHING we want will be accomplished.
President Reagan would disagree with these practices. He would have compromised and he would have kept pounding away until he got all or as much as possible of his and the voters' will accomplished. He wouldn't have recommended a public hanging.
I will go along with that.
he spends like a drunken Democrat.
His prescription program cost a friggin fortune.
I could understand having to spend after 911 to dampen all the fires. But he's done more to grow govt than Clinton even.
The list goes on and on.
But I find his stance on illegals to be revolting. Repubs are supposed to be the defenders of America. It's their number one advantage with the electorate and its their number one selling point.
During the amnesty debate, we had almost as many R's voting for the amnesty as D's. This is CONSERVATIVE??? No, it's not.
I don't demand that a politco agree with me 100% but I do agree that they agree with me and my values at least 80% otherwise why bother? At this stage, I'm in the why bother category about all the candidates.
As far as I'm concerned the Party's broken.
Some Kennedys ski backwards into trees.
Other Kennedys get on aircraft when their electrical engineer officers refuse to board.
JFK got his 3 V-12, av gas Packard PT boat run over by a ship three times his size, half his speed and five times his turning radius that he was supposedly looking for.
And of course, Ted.
This is why our founders where better. Leaders grew up and lived physical lives that educated idiots that there is a whole world of things that doesn't care who you pappy was, or what school you went to. These people knew that falling off a common horse will kill you. That ship captains and sailors were skilled and courageous men. They knew the smell and sound of musket. Todays' leaders come out of paperpushing mills, and are fairly effete and couldn't hammer a nail if their lives depended upon it. I'm not a big fan of this trend. I especially see it in todays young males from upper income families. They are ( gross generalization ) clueless.
President Reagan didn’t close the borders either, because he was dedicated, free market capitalist - like President Bush - and the party didn’t self destruct.
I believe “globalism” in it’s present definition was coined after he left office, but could be wrong: maybe it’s just that it’s being slung around almost as much as “divisive” nowadays. Seems that, if it had been much in use then, that tag would have fitted President Reagan just as much as either President Bush.
You are SO right.
Oh yes, don’t forget he put those Supreme Court judges in too, Alito and Roberts. No credit for that, Peggy????
Uh huh. Have fun with Pauly boy.
This is a tough problem. Let us take a very devisive one on to start. What is the conservative position on the war on drugs? The moralistic right who want to use law to enforce social norms think it is just fine. Those who worry about a police state, growth of government, the cost, social consequences and morality of keeping large numbers of folks locked up in a for profit prison system (privatization gone amock), the effect on our constitution, etc., think we have gone mad.
Turns out we actually had Sadam pretty well bottled up long before the invasion, but the neocons (neoimperialists) wanted Iraq. A good conservative supports the defense of the country, etc. but expending blood and treasure to create chaos in a place foresaken by our saviour when sorting it all out is beyond our wisdon - is that the conservative position?
What is our position on the WOT? We have a director of homeland security who has run so amok that he has declared England the next enemy. My view is that terrorism is best fought by the DoD and a well organized foreign intelligence service, to the extent we have one. Otherwise, don't keep the names of suspected terrorists on a secret list. Post their names, faces and crimes on the internet. A well-informed citizenry will do the rest and we can let gandma's in walkers and 4 year old blond girls go about their business unmolested.
Why do you think Ron Paul is so popular? I am a sort of supporter in a way. It is not because I think that RP is going to get into the white house or even should be President. A few of his positions are a bit extreme. But, he serves a very useful function in reminding us how far the Republican party and the country has drifted from constitutional conservatism, the governing principles of our founding fathers.
In brief, defining the conservative philosphy is key. It was easy under Regan because new deal liberalism had degenerated into socialist/communistic sloganeering. All one needed was to establish a party based on things that we knew were true as opposed to a lot of things that just were not so.
Right, and Roberts and Alito, too. The Base won’t thank him for Roberts and Alito if the SCOTUS upholds the Second Amendment, though. The Base WILL excoriate him for Roberts and Alito if the SCOTUS somehow does not.
ditto that.........worse than my disagreement w/ this wanna be ,is her selfishness , she is slapping the GOP during a primary ?
I watched her arrogance on BOR w/ Laura sitting in....
just for the record, if anyone saw Peggy last night,
could she make herself any less attractive
I believe “moderate” is the key word here. Moderation in all things, does not apply to principles, which is what we are being told we must accept.
“Advisors”, is another key word. Presidents are defined by their advisors, as they must be. The problem is when they are “re”defined by their advisors, which I beleve, has happened to almost, if not all Presidents, for at least the past hundred years (FDR being the best example).
That’s all you got? come on.
Rush, like most of the political pundits is a big bag of wind. He proved that Rush cares about Rush and doesn’t know his a$$ from his elbow.
He claims he doesn’t get involved in endorsements and then sets about to do just that by default. Huckabee and McCain will destroy the GOP, but not Mitt and Rudy? Is there some regional bias here or perhaps the Bain/Clear Channel relationship is driving his insanity?
The arrogant blowhard thinks Huckabee and McCain will destroy the GOP but not the candidates who endorsed Tsongas and Cuomo? Not the candidates who were for abortion? Really, Rush? When Rush was asked why he would not do more to support the only conservative in the race he intimated it was not his job to do so. Things seem to have changed in that regard. If either Huckabee or McCain wins, where does Rush go from there?
Four candidates remain, one no better or worse than the other and none are conservative, yet Rush seemingly prefers the NE liberals? Why didn’t he include them all? I suppose it doesn’t matter to Rush as long as the checks continue to clear. I would think that the GOP is bigger than one election and one candidate. If not, then it was not worth anything in the beginning. What happens, happens, and as long as there are some true conservatives around to pick up the pieces as usual, it won’t matter in the long term.
For TWELVE YEARS we supported Saddam supporting terrorism. That is a LOT of money. OUR money. TAXPAYER money. And it DID NOT WORK.
"Imperialism" my left toenail. It was common sense by someone with more survival sense than the average lemming - which is more than can be said for the average "paleocon" - and that someone was President Bush.
“As far as I’m concerned the Party’s broken.”
He is the only Conservative standing, and I vote Conservative. You may keep your RINOs.
Regarding Keyes' stand on "reparations", this press release might clarify the issue for you.
Reparations would be taking money from you and giving it to them, which is not what he proposed at all, and is in fact what is being done already though the welfare system.
Keyes' proposal was to exempt blacks from federal taxation for a generation or two as an economic stimulus, rather than a continuation of largely useless legislation aimed at leveling the playing field.
Does anyone have Mike Huckabees actual record. regarding his policies and decision making?
Yet still they try. Silly.
She alays seemed to us to be very solid but the last year or so she seems very out of the loop and silly acting.
For the good of the nation, we need a Constitutional Amendment—no more Bushes or Clintons—EVER. DNA testing would be required for borderline cases.
Ding... ding... ding... we have a WINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What "Republican" primary voters? For the most part, these primaries have been in blue or blue leaning states, with open primaries. If it had been that only registered Republicans were voting, you might have a point.
The “Country Club Blue Bloods” you speak of have been the base of the party for over a century. Many members of the current socially conservative “base” have only been with the party for a few decades. So it’s hard to say that the former group of stealing the party.
Still, the old base (the pro-business middle class) would be wise not to lose sight of the moral values society must hold for capitalism to succeed. Just as the party would be wise not to lose sight of the fiscal values the old base values (or we’ll have another election like 2006).
Conservatives against totalitarian government has a nice ring to it.
Yeah, but Bush’s failure to control the borders is more devastating than anything a GOP president has ever done. He’s basically allowed millions of potential Democrats to enter the country, and by pandering to them has created an atmosphere where anyone wishing to defend the borders is regarded as an “extremist”.
“Even he admits other than the show, hes been a failure all his life.”
LOL, yeah, so what? His show has been a spectacular success! What have you done that comes close?
Oh, please, willard might be a rino republican, but he is not a conservative.
I think we have also forgotten that Reps like Tom DeLay who we thought was a strong leader and bowed down to a liberal district judge...kind of like his old business of killing cockroaches. He was one elected with the Reagan agenda but turned out to cower when he really needed to lead. Took his heafty campaign pot of gold and retired and his seat was lost to a liberal.
My thoughts are, the party might regain its roots when we have to suffer 4 years of liberal leadership and have to bring the ship back to the port!
Exactly right. I wish the has been would just go away.. She wrote a few good speeches for Reagan and that’s about it.
It’s true that the country club Republicans have been around longer than the social conservatives. But that’s because no one until the 1960s was trying to use federal power to force abortion, the homosexual agenda, militant secularism, leftist public school indoctrination, and other such things on the populace. The rise in the religious right was in response to that threat. When that threat arose, the Democrats endorsed it, seeing it as a way to amass federal power and push America left by creating a culturally Marxist society. The country club Republicans yawned and looked the other way because all they cared about was taxes and spending. If it hadn’t been for the religious right, we’d be much further to the left than we are today.
Failed my Army physical, lied and went on to be a Green Beret. But then I come from sap patriotic people.
Romney, whos the wealthiest candidate running for president, still retains an investment in the private equity fund set up on Grand Cayman Island.
Agreeing with a believer on something must cause a massive headache for the religion hating liberal government. They are so conflicted that psychics on other planets are probably predicting massive human brain aneurysm.
In the first place El Rushbo is never absurd unless he is being absurd to illustrate the truth, so Peggy is wrong on that point. Also Rush is right that if McCain or Huckabee are nominated the GOP may well be ended because a move to a 3rd party may be the result.
Agree that Bush was terrible on immigration and spending, but was better than any democRAT would have been on the war.
LOL, what spin!!
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.