Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/26/2008 5:57:30 AM PST by fightinJAG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last
To: fightinJAG

The 100 percenters aren’t going to like this.


2 posted on 01/26/2008 5:59:14 AM PST by Rush4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Bush destroyed it...Nixon destroyed it...Hover destroyed it...everyone seems to be writing the party obituary. The GOP is a lot stronger than a single person. What it needs is leadership, which is currently lacking.


3 posted on 01/26/2008 6:00:20 AM PST by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

I don’t think it’s a very well-written piece. It founders and lacks evidence. Which is too bad. The evidence is there.

Bush wrecked the Republican Party by governing as a Scoop Jackson pro-defense democrat.

It was a monumental job of wrecking. The results are all around us in this election cycle.


6 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:01 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Peggy Noonan taking on the king of the Jaw Bone Media. That will be interesting.


7 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:03 AM PST by joesbucks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG
Rush is right. McCain or Huckabee will drive the Republican party further to the left. McCain is a social liberal and a fiscal liberal. Mike is a humanist that loves to ues socialism to make his utopia come true. The differences between the Demoncrats and Republicans will be hardly worth mentioning.

I’m voting for Mitt, the “Mormon”.

9 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:26 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

There’s nothing wrong with the Republican Party that couldn’t be cured with a dose of legitimate conservativism. It worked in 1980, and it worked in 1994.


10 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:58 AM PST by popdonnelly (Get Reid. Salazar, and Harkin out of the Senate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

12 posted on 01/26/2008 6:08:08 AM PST by Past Your Eyes (Bill Clinton: Life Member of the Liars' Club.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

I believe we have a great big BINGO!

We will never sell conservatism (or the GOP) to the electorate if we cannot define it. Even if we were not directly responsible, we have to point out where the “right” went wrong and exactly what we need to do to rectify the situation.


15 posted on 01/26/2008 6:10:22 AM PST by David Isaac (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG
Wasn’t it Noonan who derided the President’s inauguration speech? She has, to my knowledge, never had a good thing to say about W. Just another Washington elite.
18 posted on 01/26/2008 6:11:55 AM PST by Bushbacker1 (I was officially Fredbacker1 but now officially Romney1 and still can't change my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Brilliant headline on Drudge’s part!
Grabbed everyone’s attention, lured in all the Democrats thinking they were gonna get their Bush Derangement Syndrome jollies off it, then proceeded to read a long piece that eviscerated the Clintons. At the very end is a single sentence aside to a different story where Peggy says McCain can’t destroy the GOP because Bush already did.

Well played, Matt. Well played.


19 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:03 AM PST by counterpunch (Mike Huckabee The Religious Wrong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

There is nothing new about this. Every thing bad that has happened since he was elected is his fault.


21 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:11 AM PST by Piquaboy (22 year veteran of the Army, Air Force and Navy, Pray for all our military .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG
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.

Well of course. But to be fair, he was simply making palatable the wussified RINO approach prevalent since the gov. shut-down cave in.

Shame on me for falling for it. No more.

24 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:23 AM PST by ovrtaxt (No Rudy McRombee for me! I'm voting for Ron Paul. The GOP can curl up and die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Well damn! Me, and a very few other, use to get flamed for saying this, now it’s headlines on Drudge. Again, GWB will go down in history as the worse POTUS. He destroyed the Republican party, and most of our America.


26 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:46 AM PST by devane617 (I WILL NOT HOLD MY NOSE AND VOTE !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Harriet Myers was a hard one to take ...


27 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:50 AM PST by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Already been posted plenty o’ times FRiend, i.e., “search is your friend”...


29 posted on 01/26/2008 6:13:00 AM PST by mkjessup (GOP + FOX + National Review = The NEW "Axis of RINOs")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Bush didn’t destroy the party. He kicked it in the nuts.


34 posted on 01/26/2008 6:16:20 AM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Yep,

So now we will be left with McLame in November.


35 posted on 01/26/2008 6:16:43 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

Unwarranted alarmism.


36 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:12 AM PST by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG
Peggy:

Your point concedes that there are/were many causes for the "destruction" of the Republican party, while you specifically fingered Bush's approach on spending, the war, and immigration.

Assuming for the sake of argument that you are correct, can you really say it was Bush's approach to these issues, and not the inherent divergent approaches to these issues within the party's ranks, that caused the division?

IOW, is there a politician on the face of the earth, using political tools, that, under all the circumstances, could have reconciled all the inherent divergent views on these issues within the party to the even more wildly divergent political reality outside the party?

If not, then was it the politician who "destroyed" the party or was it political reality?

I do agree that Bush could have taken a more conservative approach in several areas. However, I do not agree that it is correct to analyze the effect of an administration on its party in "pieces."

To do so, just plays into and gives legitimacy to the "single issue" (or, in effect, multiple "single/handful of issues") mindset.

An administration can never be successful when measured against the multitude of "single issues" inherent in a party.

What will destroy the Republican party is it becoming more and more like the Democrat party: that is, more and more a loose coalition of multiple "single/handful of issues" subgroups who are unwilling to measure the party's success in terms of "net gain" rather than on a zero-sum basis viz-a-vis a handful of issues.

When subgroups form around their handful of issues, and then measure the party on a zero-sum basis---e.g., the party didn't do what I thought was appropriate on immigration [fill-in-the-blank with an issue], therefore the party accomplished NOTHING across the board---NO party can endure and NO politician can cause it to endure.

37 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:30 AM PST by fightinJAG ("Tell the truth. The Pajama People are watching you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fightinJAG

The Republican party needs to use what worked before, The Contract With America. But why did it work?

1) It wasn’t so much what it said, but how it said it. Most of us probably don’t remember a single item on it.

2) How it said it was simple, clear and honest. No hesitation, no conflicting statements, no hedging, no qualifications, no voting both ways. It was a transparent agenda. You either signed on to it, or you didn’t.

3) Most of the people who signed up were new candidates, not incumbents who had become comfortable with the Washington way of doing things. As such, they were there to break the two party “monolith of stagnation”, not to become part of it.

4) The public loved it. Not just Republican voters, but Independents, and even a lot of moderate Democrats. Finally, a simple checklist to determine who *should* be running the country, and those who just *wanted* to run the country.

5) Conversely, the professional politicians and bureaucrats hated it. It was like light shined on cockroaches, forcing them to flee. They *couldn’t* sign on to it, because it would ruin so many of their schemes and plots.


38 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:36 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson