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
You’re right. I understated things when I said that the country club Republicans yawned and looked away when the left tried to use government power to move society to the left. Many of them, such as Rockefeller, Scranton, Javits, and the elder Romney joined right in. You’re also correct that many of these guys like taxes and regulation because it keeps out the competition.
I read the whole article and found Drudge’s headline to be misleading until I got to the end of her commentary. I’ll agree that Bush hasn’t shown himself to be much of a conservative in areas but Peggy can be some what of a drama queen in her commentary.
Wrong, it has been proved and is a matter of record that the Democrats went out and recruited candidates that were sort of conservative and they run to the right of the republicans. But you already know that, however it would not fit in your spin.
I have spoken with several Europeans who live in the USA about this topic. They think that the two American political parties are very similar, to the point that they have trouble distinguishing their policies in many areas that are still contentious in Europe.
Clearly your success is more valuable to our country and I salute you for that. To denigrate the success Rush has had is small of you thougth.
Bush didn’t destroy the party. Rush Limbaugh did.
I watched her arrogance on BOR w/ Laura sitting in....
Looked like Peggy had a rough night. I am sick of her “blame Bush” columns. Laura had her on her radio show and said she agreed with Peggy.
The DemoRats have to be laughing because so called republicans like Peggy are doing their work for them.
Yes indeed-one man singlehandedly destroyed a party, the country, and the world.
How long are we going to blame Bush?
Thank you FRiend!
How long are we going to blame Bush?
You left out the universe
His speeches in 2000 were Liberalism as well. I was very surprising how many Freepers never caught on to it. It was like seeing Cybok in the Star Trek Movie. Bush like Poppy is a pro-China and a So Called Free Trader at the expense of our national security and sovereignty Globalist Liberal. Pay no attention to his W.O.T. wag the dog diversion of over six years he has used to hide that fact.
Is that illegal?
Is what illegal, telling people that willard set his company up off shore to avoid taxes? All true loyal Americans do that.
Most would if they could afford the lawyers fee. Any legal way to avoid confiscatory taxes is okay with me.
blaming is like lieing.It’s easier than actual work
The next one was waiting all those years to go back in.
And not using the most legitimate argument.
The war ending was contingent on Saddam obeying the UN sanctions.
He broke them over and over again and we waited what, 12 years?
And then the Dems put off going in long enough for Saddam to scrub the country. WMD was the wrong reason even though legitimate. The sanctions broken were reason enough.
Now who's fault was that? If he was using our money then we gave it to him. That was a Poppy creation. It may surprise you to know it was Bush Mentor Gerald Ford who actually gave terrorism the green light. Up till then if someone became a problem yo our security we quietly took them out. No chest pounding moron running around D.C. for almost a year saying Saddam or whoever were coming to get you. OK now if giving them money was wrong which I think it was from the git go then how much more so is nation building at our expense?
If our troops are sent in to a nation for war then they should have a sole military objective to destroy that nation or fight until unconditional surrender and the nation is a threat no more. Thanks to Bush the new Iraq will be far more a threat to us than Saddam ever was before it's all over as they will have modern weapon technology paid for again by guess who?
The war in Iraq wasn't about the W.O.T. it was on behalf of Sauds and is all about oil. We didn't go after any other nation linked to 911. We had more reason to go after Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and a few others than Iraq.
There are better and much more efficient ways to deal with terrorism than Bush Doctrines. The first one being find new friends. The second one is using Letters of Marque or Reprisals to hire locals who don't stick out like sore thumbs to get the job done.
As to your first statement, I believe that to be true.
And the second statement yes.
Anyone that is not strong in their Christian faith are the main targets, Baptist and all other denominations.
Same with JW’s.
I can remember just reading about him getting a national show. Time or Newsweek. My station carried it from the start and work almost stopped for days. Everything he said, we had other than ourselves, never heard any major media type say.
I just think what has happened to him is natural. He doesn’t seem as edgy, he’s older, why should he change? But I find him stale now, boring.
Also, I’ve moved on too. The Internet has given me the ability to call up writers and thinkers, dead and alive as I please.
"Well be praying for Mitt to become a Christian. I wont post lies because hes a Mormon. But I will pray he becomes a Christian"
And let's not forget that this axiom (because it's true), must be added into the mix: "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned".
Noonan has _felt scorned by GWB_ for a long time. She has never forgiven him for not choosing her as his speech writer, and the grudge she's been carrying is evident in many of her columns. She can't hide it.
I'll be happy to dub you as the resident expert and go-to guy when it comes to what constitutes "a failure".
The problem is that the two parties have become exclusively national and international. That is, the Democrats agenda is focused almost entirely on national issues, the Republicans, on international affairs.
At the extreme, the parties are losing the ability to address the others focus at all. Democrats are astoundingly naive in international affairs, and Republicans have been reduced to just a few standard issues in domestic policy that they hope will assure their reelection.
During GW Bush’s first term, he used a presidential philosophy not seen since the latter half of the 19th Century, that it is the President’s job to conduct foreign affairs, and the running of the country should be left up to congress. Which resulted in disaster, when the Republican congress ran wild with abandon. His contribution to domestic policies were “presidential signing statements”, an unconstitutional artifact.
Yet I distinguish this from the Contract With America, precisely because it breaks up the status quo. It is a tool of candidates, not incumbents, which is why when a CWA II was proposed, it was greeted with horror by incumbents, who put their foot down and said not again.
If the Republicans had each subsequent election created a new CWA, Washington by now would be a very different place.
Congressmen and senators do not like to have their feet held to the fire, when they have broken promises they made. So this is precisely what must be done.
“George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party, by which I mean he sundered it, broke its constituent pieces apart and set them against each other. He did this on spending, the size of government, war, the ability to prosecute war, immigration and other issues.”
Best part of the piece.
I guess we are all slow learners then, particularly the American sheeple.
BTTT for everything you said.
Please share some of the better items you've found.
I'm like you. I'm listening less and less to talk radio or as I refer to it, the Jaw Bone Meida. I'm simply sick of hearing the same stuff over and over again.
Rush antagonizes the Drive By Media for their shortcomings. IMHO, the Jaw Bone Media, and it's more than just Rush, is doing almost as much damage as the Drive By.
BTTT! You’re on a roll.
“Oh yes, dont forget he put those Supreme Court judges in too, Alito and Roberts. No credit for that, Peggy????”
W wanted Gonzalez and Harriet Miers in those positions. It was conservatives that foisted Roberts and Alito on him.
Several of the posters on this thread do not want to be bothered with the truth, so you just keep bothering them. :^)
For some reason here the truth about GWB often leads to attacks on Pat Buchanan.
No. It was an out and out imperialistic move by the neocons and there was no common sense about it. We only finally started to turn the "peace" around and make progress once we booted the neocons out of positions of policy influence and let the military do its job under Petraeus and such folks. The neocons under Bush had less of an idea how to win peace than did the Clinton administration.
These guys were not conservatives, and they have cost us trillions. A president does not just say, yes, let us invade Iraq. He chooses a plan and a group of people to implement that plan. Whether or not invading Iraq in the abstract was a good idea, the plan that was executed ran out when we booted out Sadam and they had no clue what to do next except swing about wildly like the school bully attacked by 100 six year olds.
No, it was not our finest moment, and Cheney, Wolfowitz and a few others will go down in ignominy as a consequence. Rumsfeld, is also tarred by it, which is a pity, because his Pentagon reform was drastically needed, and we still need lot more of it.
It all broke down because State and Defense could not work together to rebuild Iraq, and that problem I have to lay at the feet of the President himself. Interagency is always a mess and he should have waded in and started throwing his weight and people around and tossing them out until they started functioning.
But Bushes are establishment people and never buck the system. It is their downfall in the end.
What accomplishments. He got a couple of good judges in, but only after the Hariett Myers debacle. And he landed us in a godawful quagmire in the middle east because we had not plan what to do once Sadam was out. We are going to be bogged down for another 10 years. And getting support for Iraq has cost him virtually every other important policy issue.
He tried to get nuclear energy going and failed. He promised us he was going to do things for small business (deregulation and lawsuit abuse reform). Not a peep out of him on those issues. He kept renominating Greenspan which was a great idea until it wasn't, and then replaced him with his inbred second cousin. And he created the biggets boondogle of an inept bureaucracy in the history of the federal government - homeland security.
No, I don't think this is going to go down in history as a great administration.
Well I can think of two I was against, and a third that I would have been against (the invasion of Iraq) if I had understood at the time how incompetent the neocons running it were. It took us six years to find a strategy that worked with the people.
Homeland security was an even worse idea than the Department of Energy - a large spralling bureaucracy that barely has a mission or the competency to execute it, because the function is not one belonging to a centralized government but a decentralized economy (and that goes for Homeland security too, which is much more a police and FBI function than whatever it is that Homeland security really thinks it does do).
Some of the best conservative articles I’ve ever read were written by Rush in his newsletter - and he can nail a stealth liberal caller, think on his feet and expound on the topic the caller thinks he “has” Rush on in a New York minute that spins the seminar caller’s head. Rush is probably about as well educated as the average college boy who graduated from public high school and then went off to college and partied and drank for four years. Limbaugh has devoted himself to self-education; unlike most of those “Joe College” party boys who generally became lawyers like their daddys and then serve as pages for Teddy Kennedy.
Neil Bortz strikes me as really insecure and rather pontificating without the sharpness of Rush. Rush can put into words what a lot of us have been thinking for many years. - I do wish Rush would leave off the sexual innuendos and pronouncing school as “screwell”. He doesn’t need all that, and it is honestly more naughtiness than methodology I think. Rush is deeply flawed, but he is not smart like a fox is not smart.
What the GOP needs most are conservative leaders, and apparently there aren't any!
We Republicans break up only if the screaming media and drudge tell us to. Why are we Republicans? I’m one because I believe we can do it on our own, we don’t need the government to take care of us from cardle to grave. We were given the ability to think by our Creator, a thumb, which separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. We have free choice....are we Republicans or Socialists? That is the question for today.
Then sonny, go back to the democrat website, you belong there.
If President Reagan would be resurected today, in it’s climate of semisocialism and Conservatism, President Reagan would be called a liberal. My thoughts, reading what I’m reading here. Of course, I’m such a conservative, I almost squeek.
She has been silently and surly been trying to hehead our President. I personally think that she has a very large METOism when she write about someone in power, unless, of course, they think exactly as she does. She knows all.
I think every Republican Presidents, down through the ages, have DESTROYED the Republican Party from the time of Lincoln. Why is there STILL a Republican Party if it’s been destroyed????? I’m still here and so are a few others. The Party exists despite policians....if you believe in conservatism or not..make up your minds and keep on keeping on as a conservative.
LA,LA,LA,LA,LA,la,la,la,la,la, ABANDON THE GOP, THE GOP, THE GOP ABANDON THE GOP,GOP, GOP. GO DEMOCRAT, DEMOCRAT, DEMOCRAT, DEMOCRAT, BECOME A SOCIALIST, SOCIALIST, SOCIALIST AND HAVE NOTHING TO-00 GRIPE ABOUT, GRIPE ABOUT, LIVE A LIFE ON SUBSISTANCE, SUBSISTANCE and know what real poverty is. Pardon my music, but negativism really is not a good thing to harp about. DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE! Volunteer for what you believe. Join a Republican group, become an election judge, helper, begin a grass roots group, quit griping.
Not matter the things our President Bush HASN allowed, he HASN’T ALLOWED ISLAM THE PRIVILEDGE OF HITTING US AGAIN IN OUR HOMELAND.. YA’LL DON’T THINK OF THAT. I’m a Bush Backer and I really regret those out there who look only at the negative reports from the screaming media.
And How many Presbyterians, Episcopanians, Baptists, Methodists, Lutherins, convert to Catholosim or Mormanism, or Bahia????????????????? Not many that I’ve heard, we kind of stick with what we are born into. So what’s the big deal about Morman’s converting to another faith?
Well, ya’ll this is about as much negativism as I can take for the next few months. Maybe Peggy started it....but darn the skiff is overloaded with negative thought of our Republican Party and our President. Bye all.
Rush coined Mittens.
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.