Posted on 07/11/2004 12:03:02 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Conservatives, the backbone of Bush's political base, are increasingly uneasy about the Iraq conflict and the steady drumbeat of violence in postwar Iraq, Halper and some of his fellow Republicans say. The conservatives' anxiety was fueled by the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal and has not abated with the transfer of political power to the interim Iraqi government.
Some Republicans fear angry conservatives will stay home in November, undercutting Bush's re-election bid.
"I don't think there's any question that there is growing restiveness in the Republican base about this war," said Halper, the co-author of a new book, "America Alone: The Neoconservatives and the Global Order."
Another administration official involved in Bush's re-election effort has voiced concern that angry conservatives will sit out the election.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Kerry's "Immigration Policy" is basically throwing in the towel.
If Gore were president now, people would have seen through him and his nonresponse to 9/11, and we'd be gearing up for a clean sweep by conservative Republican candidates, instead of lingering outside the banquet-hall doors of the Yacht Club wing of the Party.
Inside, Mary Matalin is dancing cheek-to-cheek with the Log Cabins, illegal immigrants are serving drinks and canape's with Democratic voter-registration cards in their back pockets, and corporate moneyrunners are congratulating one another on how many Americans they've fired in the last four years.
I'm supposed to get excited about what I see?
Where ARE the conservatives? Not at the party, that's for sure.
I experienced no emotion whatsoever to Abu Grabib. I wasn't outraged nor was I embarrassed. I realize that was the minority opinion at the time but a few people do not determine the value of our country. Instead I felt satisfied that the matter was well under way to being corrected before visuals were supplied by the press.
"We could have keep that country under wraps with airpower for decades, killing or destroying anything that even appeared to be militarily *offense* in nature."
We could have maintained the status quo. We can maintain the status quo on the entrance of illegals, as well. You maintain Iraq did not present the threat that illegals do, so in one area we are justified to be inactive while on the other damned that little action has been taken.
I believe action is and was necessary on both fronts.
Iraq is part of a larger strategy. If this country is to be safe we need to reform the Middle East. This cannot be accomplished by maintaining the status quo. Iraq was a strategic target given their violation of UN sanctions. We now have Afganistan and Iraq on the road to historic reform with Iran blocked in the middle. This provides encouragement for reform especially when under the weight of the youth revolution. Iran and Syria well understand the events Bush has set to motion. It's a shame not everyone in this country is as aware.
In the end, if this strategy works this country will be safer for these actions.
On the illegal front I am concerned. More so about the weakening of the American culture than for the weapons or drugs that can be spirited in. If this country is to remain strong it needs to be reliant on the values that gave it its strength. Only, I have to say, the threat from within by the liberals is perhaps of more concern than illegals. It isn't illegals that have established institutions designed to weaken our law and values.
In order of direct threat I would place it as the following-
1) Terrorism
2) Liberalism
3) Illegals
Though China is a rising concern as well.
I take my vote seriously. hat is why G.W. can count on it come November.
Hutchinson is an outright liar. A freeper neighbor of Tom Hutchinson said he certainly did NOT post any Bush yard signs in 2000.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1169284/posts?page=57#57
Aaanhhh... what's the alternative einstein? You pissed off so much you want a pro-French socialist instead?
General Franks deserves a ticker tape parade down Madison Avenue.
Both Afghanistan and Iraq were of strategic importance in this war without regards to whether or not they had WMDs or whether or not their populations received the collateral benefit of a better government. No apology is needed for taking targets of strategic importance.
The fact that both were taken with fewer casualties than was suffered on 9-11, is just icing on the cake.
On the flip side…any service that Kerry might have rendered to the country in Vietnam was more than erased by the disservice that he rendered on his return home from that war. Remember… one aw-$hit erases a dozen atta-boys.
If Gore had been elected President we would have launched a few worthless missiles at Afganistan, waved our fist in the air, and said you better not do that again! Then crawled under the table and asked the UN to help us develop a peace treaty with Usama.
The damage done in the four years before this country could revolt at the polls would have been extensive.
Perhaps we might have a little more support of the American public.... but Al Qaeda et all would have seen his nonresponse to 9/11, also, and would have visited more such delights upon us.
Americans jumping from skyscrapers may swing support to conservatives, but I tend to dislike that type of strategy...
Get this through your thick skull, conservatives are the backbone of the GOP. Conservatives know who the enemy is. Stop trying to pick a fight with conservative Republicans. One more time, there is a small constituency of rightwingers who oppose PresBush`s reelection in 2004. They're a much smaller opposition faction compared to the one that existed during th 2000 campaign and will not be decisive in the outcome of this election.
In 2000, all major third party candidates on the rightwing received 1.1% of all the votes. That's roughly just over a million total votes cast out of some 106 million total votes cast by all Americans. Buchanan isn't running. Keyes isn't making waves. The Libertarian Party will get less then the 384K votes they recieved in 2000! Get the picture yet bucko? LOL STOP causing trouble.
Maybe in the 2008 election there might be massive defections by conservatives. This isn't the case this time.
I really believe you're still caught up in the California recall election. That's a different situation all together and has little if no bearing on support for the Bush-Cheney ticket in the general election campaign phase we're in right now..
Over here!
Check out posts 32 & 42.
The first laments that Gore was not elected, the second thinks Kerry election is a good idea now.
But when did reforming the entire middle east become America's priority? We are told routinely that there are only a handfull of terrorist there. Why would we need to reform that region of the planet? And in attempting to do so, do you not think that will only create more enemies over there? I've recently read that some top conservatives in this country seem to think so, and I tend to agree.
I was given it by another Freeper who said he enjoyed seeing it used when appropriate... I believe he would approve ;-)
Those of us who voted for Perot (and my husband and I were foolishly amongst them) taught no one a lesson, other than ourselves. I would love to have that one to do over and I would imagine an enomrmous number of the 19% of the electorate who gave him their vote have felt the same way.
Voting for a 3rd-party candidate or not at all with so much at stake just doesn't make sense.
"Stop trying to pick a fight with conservative Republicans. "
I am NOT picking a fight with conservative Republicans.
Read post 32 & 42 in this thread, wishing for Gore and Kerry. Are those the voices of "conservative Republicans"? Do you think that should go unchallenged?
We need to elect more Republicans to Congress, so Bush can get his conservative agenda passed.
Now this is very true. We need more Conservatives in the senate. We've done our part here in Missouri.
I don't agree with their logic but are they actually going to vote for Kerry? I thought that was what this agurment was about. Its one thing to envision a bunch of "what ifs", but its another to actually punch that chad out for Kerry.
What are the numbers of self-described whatevers who didn't vote for their natural candidate in previous elections?
3% actually seems remarkably low to me. In fact, given margins of error, it may be statistically indistinguishable from zero.
Voices of a tiny minority! And I never said they should go unchallenged. I said you should stop painting with such a broad brush in condemning all rightwingers as opposing Bush`s reelection. That is simple not the case. Get your head out of your behind. Instead of reading posts #32&42, you should be reading posts #29&49. I was here in 1999 and 2000. The Bush v Keyes flame Wars, the Bush v Buchanan flame wars, the Bush v Liberatarian flame wars and the general flame wars with the rights malcontents, misfits and militants were constant and intense. Absolutely nothing compared to what is happening on FR today. You're giving a false impression to other FReepers and lurkers who also, like you, weren't around here in 2000.
Again. Overwhelmingly, conservative Republicans support the Bush-Cheney ticket and its reelection to another term in office.
"But when did reforming the entire middle east become America's priority?"
On September 11th, 2001
"We are told routinely that there are only a handfull of terrorist there. Why would we need to reform that region of the planet?"
The repressive nature of their societies is such that they do not have access to the freedom of thought and opportunity offered to those in this country. Islam can be a seductive alternative to the life they are accumtomed to. It is a vehicle of Hope, strange as that may sound.
There may be a relative few that sacrifice their own lives to destroy ours but far more sympathetic to the cause that fund these actions. Eventually they are going to access WMD. We cannot stop it from occuring. We can diffuse the desire to use these weapons by fostering a culture of freedom. At the moment they have nothing to lose if they detonate a WMD. We are trying to give them a reason to live, rather than die.
"And in attempting to do so, do you not think that will only create more enemies over there? "
No, their hatred is as high as it can be. It is taught from cradle to grave. We are speaking about entire cultures that are brainwashed from the moment they let out a cry at birth, to their places of worship, to their time spent in schools. They were provoked to take action agianst us long before 9-11 as a result of the culture of hate they are a part of.
It is likely our successful operations against them may drive these extremists to a heightened desperation. It could become more dangerous in the short term as a result. This is why I'm less inclined to state we are safer as a result of our operations in Iraq. Rather, my contention is that we will be safer as a result of this new strategy towards the Middle East if it is continued.
Bush is the only one I am confident will continue this path. He has placed his future on the line. There are few politicians willing to take a stance that they aren't sure will benefit them.
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.