Skip to comments.How much is President Bush and Bushies to Blame for this Loss?
Posted on 11/07/2006 10:19:51 PM PST by Brian_Baldwin
This loss is going to have historical consequences how much is President Bush to blame for this loss? Is it too early to say that the blame for this loss rests squarely with President Bush and the Bushbots?
Bush? Or is it Bush and the RINOs? . . . And worst of all to blame, the fault of what some talk show hosts call the Harriet Myers Storm-trooper crowd of Bushbots who simply would bray like a donkey whenever conservatives brought up the obvious problems with Bush from illegal immigration, to port deals, to his globalist friends and massive spending?
Well, it isnt going to just be me saying that President Bush and the bots wasted too many years, they had the power and blew it.
Only in the last couple weeks did Bush start to try to get the message out about the good economy, but the fact is there were many conservatives who kept saying this is a winning message for a long time, if only the Republicans would get serious about getting the message out --- and the reply from the Bushbots was the DOW and the stock market isnt the same as the economy, ignoring that the important message about the economy wasnt just the stock market but much more.
The Republicans were on a dog and pony show with the Bushies, of which some now call the Bushbots, and years were wasted with what many now say were idiots who followed someone who never was a conservative anyway. The reality might just start to sink in that Bush just used some conservative lingo to take these idiots for a ride.
Yes, the President was on track regarding the war on terrorism and yes, he and everyone else were correct that this war wont be over in one or two years. The point being no, Bush didnt own the adage that this will not be a short war, but will be a long war, perhaps decades long and everyone who understood the enemy said the same, and were saying so before even Bush took office in 2000.
In fact, many of these conservatives were saying Usama bin Laden and the Islamic terrorists et all hit the Trade Center once and he was coming back to finish the job, but Bush was too busy running around with Vicente Fox talking amnesty to listen.
But dont worry, Bush will probably get his amnesty now. No, Im not talking about the amnesty for Iraqi insurgents who killed American soldiers (no amnesty for our soldiers being held for war crimes?), no I talking about amnesty for illegal aliens from Mexico. And one may as well say exactly what we are talking about here this isnt about amnesty for illegal aliens from Jamaica, nor Russians, and such its all about illegal aliens from Mexico, which once given will be irreversible, America will not be the same ever again and no one will be able to turn it around once done, because its done.
The best hope in stopping the Bush amnesty was a Republican victory in the House in 2006, but the Bushbots sunk it for us all and now with the Democrats running the show you are going to see an amnesty bill forwarded and Bush will sign it with a smile as a great example of bipartisan leadership.
The funding for the war in Iraq will likely now be cut off, a front in the battle on terrorism of which Bush wasnt fighting as a war against the terrorists anymore yes, let me say that President Bush has been doing a good job regarding the war on terrorism so lets just get that out there now - but, it seemed more like he was thinking the war on that particular front was over and he was building Democracy and sure didnt want to accidentally kill any Iraqi civilians in the process because it wouldnt look good in the New York Times and CNN.
Anyway, for sure the Democrats are going to have the leverage to screw us up on that one and cut and run not just in Iraq but everywhere. If and when the Democrats get there way, which they likely now will, what that tells the world, since Vietnam, and now Iraq which really was a punch drunk easy war as far as any war goes, the message to the world will now be that America can never win another war.
And that is really bad news since a lot of Americans are going to die as a result.
What that means is Iran now runs the region. And billions and billions and billions of dinars will sponsor further terrorism as they dance in the street having defeated the great Satan and the Islamic terrorist with a likely victory in Iraq will do exactly what they already said they are going to do: they will turn their attention to overthrowing the governments of Turkey, Egypt and Pakistan.
Pakistan already has the nuclear bomb.
The governments of Turkey, Egypt and Pakistan are next on the head-chopping list, of which the Islamic fundamentalists may likely have very good success on instigating the axe. Because, at least Bush did a good job on the war on terrorism, but you can absolutely count on it that if the Democrats are going to call the shots, the region is going to explode; the Islamic terrorist front will be global like no ones business.
The idiots have been saying the war on Iraq fomented more Islamic terrorists.
The fact is, the growth of Islamic terrorism is an historical trend of which was escalating before Iraq, was on the march and would have been as life-size now whether we invaded Iraq or not, in fact likely even more so if their march wasnt tripped up a bit in old Babylon.
We have a great economy.
But the economy wont be great after the terrorist hit us again. In fact, when it happens, dont be surprised how fast you are going to lose your job.
Democrats running the House. Now just watch the war. The war isnt over. Its now going to get bigger than ever.
Well, I guess some are saying, with the Dems running things, they take the blame for things, too. The problem with this is, the old media will still blame everything on Bush. So, unless the American people figure out that what is about to happen to America was the fault of the Democrats, then we are in big trouble.
But we were already in big trouble with this election. And a lot of Americans didnt understand the consequences now, and this will be the same crowd who wont understand later when everything blows up in our face.
I suppose some are thinking that all I have been doing is the same as the Democrats to simply blame Bush for everything.
No, I dont blame Bush for everything. I blame myself. Because, for some reason, I didnt get involved enough, involved with other conservatives to get the conservative message to Americans.
Thank you President Bush, you have had to deal with a lot of crap from the old media. As far as Im concerned, I consider them an enemy of Democracy.
In fact, I consider the Democratic Party an enemy of Democracy.
And, thank you President Bush, since 911 we, America, hasnt had another major terrorist attack on our soil. I give the President thanks for this. It has been a blessing.
I dont think this blessing is going to last much longer. Not after tonight.
Exactly, by all reports, turnout was good for the Republicans in most areas. The exit polls all indicate that the election was seen as a referendum on Iraq, and based on the perception that we were losing, voted to toss the bums out. Of course by doing they probably guaranteed that we will lose... possibly a city or three.
Graf ran in a liberal district and the National Republican party pulled out all support to him,it was pretty rotten.One could say either his loss was a statement that Arizona didn't care about illegals and amnesty,or they could say that a Republican with little money and no financial or moral support from National,hammered at by Dems,who saw he was vulnerable,was doomed by his own party.
Hayworth was totally identified with Bush although toward the end he seemed to be disengaging. And if I am not mistaken he only came to a get-tough position regards illegals somewhat late in the game. Prior to that the media crowed about his ties to Abramson and said he had received big bucks from him which I believe did a lot of damage. His ads at the end stated he had only received a small amount since 1999 and that amount was given to charity. Several people asked me what he had done before 1999 with Abramson and I didn't know.
He was also a very committed Christian and I am wondering if that was not what hurt him most.The Marriage Amendment seems to be going down which is really shocking and makes me sick and scared. He represents Tempe and parts of Scottsdale and there are many liberal elites in his district. I don't know if they redistricted or what happened because I was shocked to find he was my Congressman,maybe I've been sleeping.
But back to the climate vis a vis immigration and illegals in Arizona. All four propositions on the ballot that involved immigrants,legal and/or illegal demonstrated that the voters want a stop to the flow. English only won,no bail for illegals with a felony charge,no access to state supported services for non residents and no punitive damages for illegals involved in law suits all passed with comfortable ease.
So you can see that Arizonans are not averse to getting tough on illegal immigrants,or should I say being fair about them. I think the problem either involves Hayworth's Christianity or his support of Bush and the war in Iraq and has very little to do with immigration.
RE: THE FOUR THINGS!
You are absolutely spot on. We lost the voters because we got away from acting decisively based on our core beliefs.
Actually, I believe McCain was against the federal marriage ban, but he supported a proposal to change Arizona's state constitution to ban gay marriage. Rudy is very open to gay rights with the sole exception of calling gay civil unions "marriage".
Please do not misunderstand. I am NO fan of McCain whatsoever. Your point about Rudy's WOT stance is a good one and gives me pause about my initial response to the hypothetical of them being the two main primary choices.
By all reports, Republican turn out was good. Dem was better and they got a larger chunk of the independent or "middle of the road" vote.
And getting an even more incompetent one, as far as achieving any real conservative agenda, heck even American objectives.
There is that.
et tu, brute?
A major difference between Democrats and Republicans. Dems circle the wagons around their people. Republican eat their own.
Baker as Kissinger, who'd thunk it?
The only question is, can we slink out fast enough to avoid a complete cut off of funds for the pull out.
And one more, is there a helipad on the roof of the US embassy in Baghdad? (And in Kabul too!?). .... Pelosi is on Fox, saying that we need a change of direction in Iraq. Does anyone honestly believe she means sending in more troops, more air power, and blasting every "insurgent" stronghold into rubble? Don't think so.
"when the GOP realizes you people have drug them too far to the right"
What exactly do you mean, "too far to the right."
Do you think we should not be pro-life? Do you think we should ban semi-auto weapons and hi-cap magazines?
I genuinely want to know...I'm curious as to how far your branch of the GOP and I are.
Which Pelosi and Harry Reid aren't going to allow.
Although I disagree with part of your basic thesis that it's now just an Occupation and reconstruction. Those going OK to very well. But the jihadies have done enough to allow the MSM to give us another Tet.
No, I think we didn't need a special Senate session to deal with Terri Schaivo, to mention one thing, for starters.
They pandered way to much to the extremes in this party.
A few weeks ago when Bush sat down for some Ramadan chow FOR THE SIXTH STRAIGHT STINKING YEAR, with moslems while we were losing 100 men in one month... THAT was it.
People realized that Kinder Gentler Compassionate KGC warfighting was indeed going to last many many years because our own President continued to insist that islam was a religion that deserved to be honored...
"...we welcome and honor the Muslim faith in our nation. Our society is enriched by our Muslim citizens."
Thats when the bullshiite meter pegged and the American people decided enough was enough.
I work in the Defense Industry. Have my whole career since Grad school which was after my active duty time (after which I was a Reservist, then a Guardsman, and then a Reservist again). I'll be losing my job, (again BTW, I also got Clintonsized in '98) well before the next attack, unless it comes sooner than I anticipate.
Just yesterday now (7th) we had a briefing by the Commanding General of the command I support. Before all this, they were to lose 5% of their civilian slots, and 10% of their direct support contractor slots. Plus a good sized cut in developement contracts. They'd already lost more military slots than that over the last year or two.
I shudder for the future, both mine and my country's.
Gato, who do you think will lead the GOP in '08? who do you want?
WHO do you think will be the new leader of the GOP?
DING-DING-DING, lock the thread, we have an early winner. Thanks for speaking truth to idiocy, Howlin.
Is it too late to say that we may have a new definition of RINO, too? So-called Republicans have cut off the country's nose to spite its face, and will have to bear the awful consequences with the rest of us.
I hope President Bush and Vice President Cheney aren't found within ten miles of each other in the next two years. Freedom can't take a chance on succession...
My guess is a few hours LOL.
I hardly call a 1% win over a Ford a joyous victory! I am extremely dissapointed that the margin was not huge!
It makes you wonder just who the Republicans In Name Only are, doesn't it?
For the next two years it will still be Bush and Rove. The question is will they have learned anything by this debacle. I do look for a struggle at the grass roots level for the direction of the party. Hopefully, a conservative will emerge. Right now I am putting my money on the resurrection of Newt. He has shown he knows how to beat the left without becoming compromised in the process.
Waddya mean? Ford singlehandedly exposed the threat that a nuclear Australia would pose. /s
|Year||President||Δ Dem||Δ GOP||Δ WH||Δ Dem||Δ GOP||Δ WH|
LOL, Actually I don't know what we will do without a Ford to bash.
Right on, brother.
The new leaders on the Republican side of the isle will be more conservative. Congress will learn from this even if Bush doesn't. They have to run again. He doesn't.
Whenever there is a big loss by either party, the party moves back to its base. Republicans move right. Democrats move left.
The big question now is can the base overcome the party establishment and nominate a conservative in 08. If not we'll have a Democrat president and both houses of congress.
without becoming compromised in the process
<< Is it too early to say that the blame for this loss rests squarely with President Bush and the Bushbots? >>
Is it too late to say yes?
I was late to this thread because I've been trying -- with no little difficulty -- to exercise adult restraint in composing an email reply to a good friend, a self-proclaimed Republican and conservative, who's gloating ad nauseum about "the lesson Bush has been taught today."
The guy's a veteran, has a PhD. from a respected school, built a multi-million dollar business from scratch, and bitches to high heaven about taxes, the minimum wage, welfare, crooked politicians -- and President Bush!
His first email tonight after the returns started coming in could have been written by Chuckie Schumer. I hope he enjoys watching the fruits of his labors against his own interests...
No, I take that back; tonight, I'll cherish the consoling thought that he'll be as miserable as his choices will make me in the coming days and months. I'll pray for forgiveness tomorrow.
No real Republican gloats about being happy about higher taxes and federally funded stem cell research and tax cuts and minimum wage and a million other things.
Let's see how smug he is when you point out that this "victory" was orchestrated by Rahm Emauel, Hillary's butt boy, and that she will be our next president.
It's sad, watching old friends as senility sets in...
I'm just curious what you consider extremes.
The GOP is going to move to the Left, and I'd really like to know if abortion, for example, is not that big of a deal to your wing of the GOP, or gun control?
They going to move to the middle; the GOP is more than just the extreme right wing in this party. You all don't seem to understand or like that part.
My wing of the party is pro-life and against gun-control.
We just realize that the people we vote for aren't going to agree with US 100 percent of the time.
A thought lost on you one agenda people.
Rudy left his wife, too.
I'm pro-life in all respects, but must agree with Howlin on this point; Johnson beat Goldwater, in large part, over his "extremism ... is no vice" comment, and I suspect a well-populated Bell curve would show that 84% of voting Americans aren't voting the extremes, either way...
Sorry -- "ping"...
Not to you in particular Howlin...Fox commentator just said we "most probably" lost the senate.
I don't really consider myself an "agenda person."
I voted for a pro-choice Pubbie for OR governor, (Ron Saxton) who, unfortuately, lost.
Because he would have worked with us in RTL.
I do think that Terri Schiavo was murdered by starvation, and I wish they had saved her life.
I wish I could clearly understand what exactly happened to the GOP tonight. It wasn't being a moderate that cost elections, it wasn't being a conservative, it wasn't being a "seal-up the borders" person, it was ALL of those factors that cost votes.
#244. I think it was the constant pounding by the MSM shilling for the dems. Enemedia!!!!
They cannot overrride a single veto.
No. Up until tonight, I was sanguine about the war. But now, it doesn't matter if American troops never lost a battle, American public opinion would demand the withdrawal of troops in a year.
I think it was the immigration issue that lost it for us. I knew it was a loser from the very beginning. I would love to see what our Hispanic vote was tonight.