Posted on 05/17/2006 7:47:58 AM PDT by Pukin Dog
Edited on 05/17/2006 8:30:59 AM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
In all honesty, I'd have to say Mass. and Calif beat us all.
Now, is the NJ legislature worse than the Pa. one? Hmmmmmm
What a list. Conservative bashers of the President largely don't know what they are talking about. They should still be celebrating his actions and stance on abortion alone which used to be the "single issue" issue. They have forgotten too quickly and now have jumped to the new "single issue"....immigration.
George Bush has pushed forward the conservative agenda not only on abortion but many other issues which are listed on Southack's list. Pres. Bush is not only a great guy, but a great leader for America. The problem is that too many conservatives watch TV and follow the lead of the MSM, whom they claim to hate. The MSM are loving it and when they get conservatives to get angry they also know their ratings go up. Clever ploy. I wish conservatives would get smarter, but I don't even know if that would help. They love to get angry which is a big part of the problem.
I hope many print out that list of Southack's and meditate on it. It is a very impressive list of our President's accomplishments despite opposition from all sides. And he is not close to being done yet thank God.
Re: port 2404 - Good post.
As my father used to say, "these aren't your grandfather's Democrats". 40-50 years ago, you could count on at least *some* Democrats being pro-defense, pro-growth, pro-family, pro-fiscal soundness, etc. Nowadays, can we name 10 Democrats in the House like that? In the Senate?
The Democrats have pandered and sold themselves out to all manner of nutter, splinter groups, such that they cannot offer any coherent national strategy other than giving people "more stuff", especially those who, in the words of Dick Gephardt, are "losers in life's lottery". What a bunch of monkey muffins. Unfortunately, a lot of folks buy into that.
The VAST majority of Democrats are simply not going to be able to deliver on national security, pro-growth, pro-family, etc issues. They try and try to re-invent themselves, but it always seems to fail. I've always said that the biggest threat to a Republican being elected in is a Democrat that has conservative principles. But hose folks are just not around much anymore. Knowing that, and knowing what Congresswoman Pelosi has stated about her intentions if she becomes Speaker of the House, it should be no surprise what's going to happen if Democrats get control of the House or Senate. NO SURPRISE.
As stated previously by others, primary elections are the place to make our voice herd. That and keeping in contact with elected officials. Write them, call them, let them know you are holding them accountable. I used to say that if George Pataki was the Republican candidate, that I would sit out the election in 2008. But I can't do that, even though I think he's been an awful governor in New York the last 4-6 years - the alternative is even worse (am hoping Pataki never gets past a more conservative candidate). But if he is the Republican candidate, I'm voting for him. The alternative will not be good.
So, in other words, Bush is counting on broad support from the Dems to pass his immigration agenda.
Which means all the yelling at the border security folks that they want the Dems to win is absurd - because the man they are backing on this issue, President Bush, is allied WITH THE DEMS.
No, it means that President Bush is allied with the Republican Senate over the the Republican House on this ONE issue. The Democrats want to IMPEACH President Bush. To say without any qualification he is allied with them is false, period.
A day late but STILL more than worth the read BUMP! EXCELLENT rant, PD.
No, he's not even allied with the Republican Senate - only about a third of the GOP voted against the border security first resolution.
For Bush to get his way, he needs the nearly full support of the Dems in both houses. That alone shows he is wrong on this issue.
Here is an excellent post on this subject, it mirrors what I was trying to say, heck, maybe they copied my thoughts..... Please read and comment: http://smokeonthewater.typepad.com/smokeonthewater/2006/05/us_or_them.html
A gread read for this topic, sorry for the repeat: http://smokeonthewater.typepad.com/smokeonthewater/2006/05/us_or_them.html
I will support our President till my last breath.
Your memory and mine are in conflict. I remember most of the anger at slick was due to the fact that he was a political shape-shifter - his views seemed to follow his polls . The first year there was dont-ask-don't-tell and Hillarycare, but from then on it was all about triangulation.
It only requires a short answer and not a rehash of all things good or bad about the Republicans or how horrible the country will be if the Dems regain a majority. In fact, I won't think less of you if you choose not to answer. The question can be left to hang about and be pondered.
Question; if the Republicans lose their majority in the upcoming or future elections, whose fault will it be,,, The elected officials and their supporters,,,,or the people who choose not to vote for them?
Of course, that all changed during midterms. He lost 40 seats.
Top of the morning to all! (.....after I've paged through Post #~1300 to here)
Don't forget, the Dems are in a pickle over this, too. The unions do NOT want amnesty. I'd say about half the Dem rank-and file disagree with THEIR leaders on this one. It's a political loser all around.
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.