Returning power to their hands is NOT the answer. It has been tried before and was DEVASTATING to our country. So DEVASTATING that even if President Bush had been another Reagan, we would be unable to make up for that damage in two terms of such a Presidency.
How did Reagan accomplish what he did with a primarily and overwhelmingly Democrat Congress? He made his case to . . . . the people, right? And the people pounded their Democrat legislators to do the right thing. He delivered such a powerful message that he won in a landslide in his second run. Those people are still there waiting and hoping that someone will pick up the mantel and run with it. The GOP won't even look down to see it at its feet.
How did we get the many successes that we did when Clinton was president? The people saw an enemy within and we fought him. We, through Congress, forced him to sign a lot of good legislation and back off some of the bad and the Congress -- as a strong minority -- fought for us. When we gave them the majority that the GOP asked for and the POTUS that they asked for, they suddenly lost their way and their needs and their pork barrel, vote buying spending took precedence over principle. It seems that when they needed us, we got what we wanted. Now that they think they don't need us, we get squat. Maybe they need reminded that they do need us is all that I'm suggesting.
What you advocate is sheer suicide. I have chosen to lend my energies to defeating the greater of my enemies which is the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
What I advocate is a battle for principle both within the Party and against the other party. It's a battle that we may or may not win, but it is a battle that must be fought.
Your preferred method, even if you don't recognize it, is surrender to the enemies within the Party who don't want to do battle with the other side and would switch to the other side if such a battle started. We've played the LoTE game for 40 years or more and all we have reaped was more and more evil, little bits at a time.
I suggest you go see UNITED 93. Perhaps that will refocus your priorities.
My priorities? I have supported him fully in the over seas WoT. I want the borders to be sealed. He doesn't. He's fighting half a war. Perhaps he needs to see United 93.
I just saw the traveling 9/11 Memorial on Friday. I know what happened that day. I know who did it. I know that we still let such people into this country every day, sometimes through the front door and sometimes through the back door -- our unsealed borders.
I wish that they would show the news footage of 9/11 every week to remind other people that we are at war.
Wars do have multiple fronts that sometimes must be fought simultaneously. We don't always have the luxury of fighting them one at a time. The overseas part and the borders both need to be done and done now and done right. There are many other domestic issues that need addressed. Sadly, neither this president nor this Congress seems willing to address them.
That means that fixing this Congress is part of our battle too. If we allow obstructionists to remain, we will not get any closer to victory on any front.
You consistently advocate "punishing" the more conservative candidate who failed to live up to expectations, so that the flawed conservative looses to his/her more Liberal opponent.
Reagan won by a landslide his first election as well. As you recall the MSM announced him as the winner somewhere around 7pm.
That we got more conservative legislation passed under Clinton as opposed to President Bush is highly debatable.
" What I advocate is a battle for principle both within the Party and against the other party. It's a battle that we may or may not win, but it is a battle that must be fought."
No, you advocate that the Republicans give up their majority status to minority status, because you believe they are more effective as a minority party. Would we have gotten what appears to be two conservative Supreme Court Justices, if the Democrats had been in power? No, two more Liberal appointees would be there instead.
This is not the Democratic Party of the 60's, but the nutso, whacko, abortion party of the new millennium. We cannot afford to return such a party to a majority party particularly when we are engaged in a war the Democrats now strongly oppose.
"Your preferred method, even if you don't recognize it, is surrender to the enemies within the Party who don't want to do battle with the other side and would switch to the other side if such a battle started. We've played the LoTE game for 40 years or more and all we have reaped was more and more evil, little bits at a time."
My preferred method is to get the most conservative candidates elected. Your preferred method, is to get the more Liberal candidates elected. And no your strategy was implemented before. It gave us 8 years of Clinton, and a strong possibility of 8 more years with another Clinton. Under him (it wasn't bit by bit) we reaped lots of evil in 8 years time.
We aren't surrendering to the enemies within the party, we are leaving some of that fight for another day. But you are surrendering to the GREATER enemies outside the Republican party.
Our TWO most prominent great enemies are the Democrats and the terrorists. And our second enemy has at times been most supportive of our first. Not a good idea to allow them to again become a majority party, particularly now for that reason alone.
In the American political context which is a two party system, it is better to fight one party at a time. I choose the Democrats.
"Wars do have multiple fronts that sometimes must be fought simultaneously. We don't always have the luxury of fighting them one at a time. The overseas part and the borders both need to be done and done now and done right. There are many other domestic issues that need addressed. Sadly, neither this president nor this Congress seems willing to address them."
Mostly everyone (except our leaders Republican or Democrat) is in agreement on the above. We the people, at least realize this is a two pronged fight and the borders must be sealed in addition to our battle overseas. But UNITED 93 reminds us that we are in a war against a common enemy, the terrorists and their Leftist supporters, and we must focus our energies against them not the Republican Party.
"That means that fixing this Congress is part of our battle too. If we allow obstructionists to remain, we will not get any closer to victory on any front"
There is so little maneuvering room in American politics, we can focus our energies on only ONE party,(and the WOT) or we will lose the battle against both. We can pick off a Specter-like Republican here and there, but if Republicans again become the minority Party we will lose everything.