Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A One-Time Bush Skeptic Admits His Error (Journalist Who Actually "Gets" It! Amazing!)
The Houston Chronicle ^ | 6/2/04 | Joshua Muravchik

Posted on 06/02/2004 11:34:39 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Are we safer now than we were before we began to fight back against the terrorists? Perhaps not, just as we were not safer when we began to resist Hitler, prompting him to declare war on us. Back then, we were not safer until we had won. And we will not be safe now until we have defeated the terrorists and their backers.

Is this really so hard to understand?

41 posted on 06/03/2004 5:24:23 AM PDT by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

It is evident you don't read it.The barnicle is a scum sucking liberal rag, just ask anyone who has ever read it.

42 posted on 06/03/2004 5:43:55 AM PDT by eastforker (The color of justice is green,just ask Johny Cochran!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

Comment #43 Removed by Moderator

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Perhaps even the decision to take on Iraq after Afghanistan was a strategic mistake in the larger war. It might have been better to have concentrated on overthrowing Iran's mullahs or forcing Syria out of Lebanon. In World War II, Allied leaders and commanders debated fiercely which fronts to concentrate on and in what order.

There isn't a Leftist in America who gets this concept - that sooner or later, all of these countries have to be taken out for us to win the war. Whether Bush did Iraq in the right order or not, it's just one piece of the puzzle, like taking Sicily before invading Italy in WWII. The Left's arguments against Iraq betray their true desire - for the US to just surrender to terrorism, in the hope that we can buy a few more years of peace.

44 posted on 06/03/2004 5:52:25 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClancyJ

They throw in his supposed weak intellect, yet the next noise eminating from a liberal's piehole places Bush as the mastermind of an evil plot to do "something." Note that the "something" is never clearly delineated, or if it is, there is never a hint of what the libs would DO to rectify the "problem."
And about thirty percent of the population willingly drinks the demoncratic Kool-Aid every time it is offered.
The 'Rats could have a field day if they honestly evaluated some of Bush's policies and offered real alternatives(and a candidate who is more animated than the typical corpse),but they are incapable of this.

45 posted on 06/03/2004 6:09:04 AM PDT by macrahanish #1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

I wouldn't say that someone who accuses the person most responsible for aggressively bringing the Cold War to a premature end (sooner than it would have otherwise) by fighting the enemy both directly and by proxy in places like Afghanistan, El Salvador, Grenada and Nicaragua as being timid and uncommitted to our nation's security "gets" it, but it's a nice piece nonetheless.

46 posted on 06/03/2004 6:48:30 AM PDT by LincolnLover ("Madam, I'm Adam")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LincolnLover
When dealing with former liberals... remember: baby steps. Baby steps. :)
47 posted on 06/03/2004 6:50:47 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle (I feel more and more like a revolted Charlton Heston, witnessing ape society for the very first time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

Come....come to the dark side my son....

48 posted on 06/03/2004 7:11:26 AM PDT by bad company (may the horse be with you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist; TexasCowboy; Eaker; Flyer; Xenalyte

An interesting article, and even more so given where it was printed.

49 posted on 06/03/2004 7:19:14 AM PDT by HoustonCurmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zbigreddogz
I guess this is kind of nice, but seeming as how this is in a Texas newspaper

It means something, though I'm not sure what. The five largest newspapers in this state are far more liberal than the population. The Houston paper is one or the worst two.

50 posted on 06/03/2004 7:21:40 AM PDT by HoustonCurmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: auggy
The "weak intellect", Is coming from the accusing side. Dumbocrats seem to , more and more, accuse the Republicans of what they are guilty.

The two noebolshevik founders of were on C-SCAM earlier this morning. One they wqere moved off their hate-spewing, half-truths and outright lies talking points these were two of the most vacant, idiotic people I have ever heard. The drug-addled looks in their eyes screamed out that the lights are on, but nobody's home.

51 posted on 06/03/2004 7:26:36 AM PDT by Morgan's Raider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan

My biggest problem with the WOT is that it seems to be a never ending war. How do we define what is terrorism, who is a terrorist and what we have to do to defeat it? I don't want the USA running around the world acting as a global policeman.

I've been reading about trying to get rid of the house of Saud, the Syrian government, the Iranian govenernment, North Korea, et al. When do we decide that we have finally won this war?

52 posted on 06/03/2004 7:30:47 AM PDT by Greenback_dollar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Yep, we finally beat the crap out of the bully, and now we're the bad guy. It's human nature for the other school cowards to resent the guy who fights back, I guess.

53 posted on 06/03/2004 7:53:41 AM PDT by Travis McGee (----- -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Morgan's Raider

That sounds about right. The majority of them are , at least, politically illiterate. Most are morally bankrupt. That doesn't leave much to be desired.

54 posted on 06/03/2004 8:46:02 AM PDT by auggy ( /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: EdReform

read later...

55 posted on 06/03/2004 10:12:24 AM PDT by EdReform (Support Free Republic - All donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Greenback_dollar
When do we decide that we have finally won this war?

About the same time we win the war against robbery, homicide, adultery and prostitution. That is, never. But that doesn't mean that the war shouldn't be fought.

56 posted on 06/04/2004 5:41:18 AM PDT by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: macrahanish #1

Oh yes - Bush and his ol' oil buddies setting up this war for oil. As if a president of the U. S. would split families up, send our boys and girls into danger, see many killed and leaving children without parents merely to help his oil buddies.

I actually had someone say he sent them to war for revenge for "daddy". I told him if a U.S. president would send soldiers for personal revenge he should be impeached.

57 posted on 06/04/2004 8:50:24 AM PDT by ClancyJ (It's just not safe to vote Democratic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

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