Free Republic 2nd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $22,048
25%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 25% is IN!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Posts by rightwing2

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • GOP Seeks to End Term Limits on House Speaker [Hastert Popularity]

    01/05/2003 6:54:56 PM PST · 31 of 44
    rightwing2 to Grut; Scholastic; belmont_mark; DoughtyOne
    Hm... term-limiting leadership positions was the 'pubbies original work-around for not term-limiting members of Congress as per the Contract With America. Apparently the CWA is another one of those famous government deals that're binding only so long as they're convenient.

    This is outrageous! Hastert is a moderate who needs to move aside for the more conservative House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. We need a more principled Speaker of the House who will stand for conservative Republican principles and not cave to the RATS. This sounds more like the rank in file in the HRC are just happy not to have Newtie as a weapon to be wielded by the RATS to defeat them in the elections.
  • HI-02: Democrat Ed Case Wins Hawaii Election

    01/05/2003 6:47:27 PM PST · 4 of 8
    rightwing2 to Mr. Morals
    Democrats combined got over 78% of all votes cast. The GOP has no chance in Hawai'i on the Federal level. In fact, Gov. Linda Lingle would be considered a left-of-center Democrat in many states. The big surprise (for me) was the extremely poor showing for former Honolulu mayor Frank Fasi. He got a paltry 0.6% of votes cast. I think the GOP won't run anybody but sacrificial lambs from here on out. I also think Case has this seat for as long as he wants. Matsunaga might be able to pull off an upset primary victory in 2004 if he plays his hand right. Barring that, Case will be a lifer.

    My buddy finished in seventh place overall and in fourth place for GOP candidates. I told him the race was unwinnable, but did he listen? No. He is native Hawaiian so he thought he had a chance. He should have run in the original GOP primary race against Patsy Mink. He would have done a lot better. Once again the RATS captured 80-85% of the vote.
  • LOTT TO BE RULES COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN?

    01/03/2003 11:56:46 AM PST · 60 of 140
    rightwing2 to RobFromGa
    Very nice gesture by Santorum here. However, since Lott is already out, there is no need to offer him a chairmanship unless its Commerce in order to get McShame out of there.
  • Brazil Sees Coalition With Venezuela, Cuba

    01/03/2003 6:06:11 AM PST · 35 of 60
    rightwing2 to MonroeDNA; HalfIrish; NMC EXP; OKCSubmariner; Travis McGee; t-shirt; DoughtyOne; SLB; Sawdring; ...
    What's with all these latin commies lately? Who dropped this ball?

    This Communist insurgent victory in Latin America's biggest and most powerful country has been a long time coming. Both Castro and Lula have worked hard to take control of Brazil, a nation which developed, but never tested two atomic bombs almost a decade ago. Brazil could convert its satellite booster rockets into ICBMs with relative ease. Can anyone say, Cuban missile crisis redux? The Bush Administration dropped the ball. Against the advice of much more farsighted Latin America specialists, the President opted for a policy of non-interference in the Brazilian presidential eleciton which virtually assured the Marxist takeover of Brazil. We will spend the next half century or more reaping the consequences of his lack of vision in failing to oppose Communism and choosing to appease and accomodate Communist dictators and regimes instead.

    For more insight into what the future holds for Brazil, please see the following articles.

    CNSI Articles on the Ongoing Communist Takeover of Latin America
  • Castro, Chavez Attending Brazilian Inauguration - "Jan. 1 is no longer a Cuban monopoly"

    01/02/2003 11:08:00 AM PST · 44 of 49
    rightwing2 to Paulus Invictus; goldilucky; Tailgunner Joe; Cincinatus' Wife
    With Cuba and Venezuela now in commie hands, Brazil will now follow their lead and it's goodbye (adeus!) to Brazil and Latin America. Is the Admin even worried? I see nothing being done to counter this threat. Hells bells-- they haven't even addressed coherent ways to counter the huge invasion of illegals from Mexico! They seem to be asleep at the switch in DC, or am I wrong?

    You are not wrong. The Bush Admin is asleep at the switch. In addition to demoting Otto Reich from his position as Asst Secretary of State, they are pulling out the welcome mats for Lula's Red takeover. Of course, they remain supportive of the ongoing illegal immigrant invasion of the US and have announced plans to reward hundreds of thousands of them with social security benefits, a plan which would cost $1 billion a year.

    CNSI Articles on the Marxist Takeover of Latin America
  • Castro, Chavez Attending Brazilian Inauguration - "Jan. 1 is no longer a Cuban monopoly"

    01/02/2003 11:01:13 AM PST · 43 of 49
    rightwing2 to Tailgunner Joe
    Great picture of the red gains in Latin America. The only problem is that you missed Ecuador which has also been taken over by a Chavezista President.
  • Castro, Chavez Attending Brazilian Inauguration - "Jan. 1 is no longer a Cuban monopoly"

    01/02/2003 10:59:35 AM PST · 42 of 49
    rightwing2 to Tailgunner Joe
    Very telling picture on post #14 which has the leaders of Sweden, Cuba, South Africa and Chile all lined up in a row applauding Lula on a balcony. The leaders of Sweden and Chile are socialist party members while Castro of Cuba and Mbeki of South Africa are official members of their nations' respective Communist parties. Reminds me of a May Day military parade with Communist leaders cheering on their imperious leader. Very distressing...
  • Castro, Chavez Attending Brazilian Inauguration - "Jan. 1 is no longer a Cuban monopoly"

    01/02/2003 10:57:56 AM PST · 41 of 49
    rightwing2 to Tailgunner Joe
    Very telling picture on post #14 which has the leaders of Sweden, Cuba, South Africa and Chile all lined up in a row applauding Lula on a balcony. The leaders of Sweden and Chile are socialist party members while Castro of Cuba and Mbeki of South Africa are official members of their nations' respective Communist parties. Reminds me of a May Day military parade with Communist leaders cheering on their imperious leader. Very distressing...
  • Brazil inaugurates first leftist president

    01/02/2003 10:55:29 AM PST · 20 of 21
    rightwing2 to Cincinatus' Wife; belmont_mark; Enemy Of The State; Gunrunner2; Scholastic
    Cuban President Fidel Castro, left, speaks with his counterpart from Venezuela, Hugo Chavez when their attend the inauguration ceremony of the new Brazilian president Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, Brasilia, Tuesday, Jan. 1, 2002. (AP Photo/Eladio Farines)

    Regarding the picture on your post #13, did you see the picture in today's Washington Times? It has a picture of the leaders of Sweden, Cuba, South Africa and Chile all lined up in a row applauding Lula on a balcony. The leaders of Sweden and Chile are socialist party members while Castro of Cuba and Mbeki of South Africa are official members of their nations' respective Communist parties. Reminds me of a May Day military parade with Communist leaders cheering on their imperious leader. Very distressing...
  • Brazil inaugurates first leftist president

    01/02/2003 10:50:00 AM PST · 19 of 21
    rightwing2 to deathscythex
    As Silva traveled to Congress in the back of a convertible Rolls-Royce, a sea people of chanted "Lula! Lula!" and raised red flags bearing the color his party in the air. red flags? uh oh...yall know what that means....commies just took brazil.....

    This is no exaggeration. Lula was backed by the same two Brazilian Communist parties that have backed him in all four of his presidential runs even against the presidential candidate of a Communist party spinoff. What do they know that most Americans don't?
  • Brazil inaugurates first leftist president

    01/02/2003 10:48:12 AM PST · 18 of 21
    rightwing2 to Norman Arbuthnot; Cincinatus' Wife; belmont_mark
    Of course, it goes unmentioned in this article that Lula is intent upon developing a nuclear weapons program for Brazil and has stated that publicly. I'm sure he is keeping a close eye on events in Korea. If we accept blackmail from the NKs it does not send a good message (for us) to the Lula's of the world.

    Of course once Lula develops nukes, that will just mean one more nuclear-armed Marxist dictatorship for us to appease with hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign aid a year just like North Korea. Here we are confronted with a potential new Cuban Missile Crisis in our own hemisphere and the Administration is reacting as if it were the inaugeration of just another democratically elected leftist president. They had better wake-up now and react to this dangerous situation before events overtake them.
  • Frist could be too nice for his new job

    01/02/2003 8:47:40 AM PST · 25 of 44
    rightwing2 to Theodore R.; Samurai_Jack
    I think Dr. Frist, a most attractive personality, will be primarily a "water carrier" for G.W. Bush. It will be like G.W. is not only president but Senate majority leader as well. I can never imagine Frist bucking Bush on anything. So if there is no partial-birth abortion ban voted by the Senate in either 2003 or 2004, it will be the fault of none other than G.W. Bush himself! (By the way Dr. Frist voted for Senator Gore in 1990!)

    Yes, Frist will rule the Senate as if he were a loyal member of the White House staff which will further increase the power being amassed by President Bush which has begun to worry me from a constitutional perspective even as one of his supporters. If Frist voted for Gore in 1990, that will torpedo his chances of winning the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, which given his pro-choice credentials is definitely a good thing for religious conservatives. The one good thing about Frist as Senate Majority Leader is that the Democrats will find it virtually impossible to demonize him. They'll have to use House Majority Leader Tom DeLay as their bogeyman in 2004.
  • Frist could be too nice for his new job

    01/02/2003 8:42:15 AM PST · 24 of 44
    rightwing2 to Samurai_Jack; Theodore R.; Scholastic
    It was dispicable of the demRATS to have vented their electoral frustration onto Sen Lott in that manner. But I didnt think it was imaginable anyone more inclined to accept a bullseye on his back than Trent Lott, isnt this the one who allowed clinton to get away with chinagate by dealing away the impeachment? I dont know alot about frist but one thing I can see is that he is smart. Hopefully smart enough not to step in it like Lott did. As majority leader he is beholden to his peers to maintain the integrity of the conservative platform regardless of his personal bias. And his peers are beholden to the voters (THATS YOU AND ME) to demonstrate progress on the conservative agenda.

    Yes, Lott caved badly on the impeachment of Clinton and I criticized him for that. However, he was a reliable pro-life vote unlike Bill Frist who since declaring himself pro-choice on abortion on several occasions during his 1994 campaign has tried to be more stealthy in playing down his continued support for legalized abortion on demand to avoid alienating pro-life voters. Frist is admirable on a personal level. However, Frist's conservative credentials are essentially non-existant. He is a noted centrist who prefers to avoid confrontation which is not a quality conservatives look for in a GOP Senate Majority Leader. Conservatives need to hold him accountable if he continues betraying the conservative GOP agenda as expected. For more info along these lines, please see the following Frist expose that ran in WorldNetDaily a couple weeks ago.

    Bill Frist’s election as senate majority leader would be a stunning setback for pro-life conservatives
  • Frist could be too nice for his new job

    01/02/2003 6:07:25 AM PST · 15 of 44
    rightwing2 to Oldeconomybuyer; HalfIrish; DoughtyOne; SLB; Sawdring; Scholastic; belmont_mark; Paul Ross; ...
    Had they, some wondered, picked an admirable man for the wrong job?...Dr. Frist then suggested he was now embarking on an even ''heavier'' responsibility, implying that the Grand Old Party needs radical surgery.

    Frist announced that his mission was to establish a new bipartisan consensus in the Senate and essentially renounced confronting the RATs on issues of importance to GOP conservative base voters which was no surprise to those who have watched his Senate career. His new mission is to remake the once conservative Senate GOP in his own moderate image. Frist is the pro-choice moderate GOP leader Democrats have always wanted because he will work hard to pass Democrap legislation. He will be an absolute disaster as GOP majority leader with his anti-gun, pro-choice, pro-illegal immigration stands. Frist's inaugeration as Senate Majority Leader on January 7th will spell the death knell for conservatives in the Senate. Lott was much better and despite his verbal gaffes will be sorely missed as a more principled GOP leader, less inclined towards bipartisanship and collaboration with the RATS than his more moderate successor.
  • N Korea charges US rushing towards confrontation

    12/27/2002 1:49:38 PM PST · 25 of 28
    rightwing2 to BlackJack; Theodore R.; belmont_mark; Scholastic; Sawdring; Enemy Of The State
    N Korea is really making a lot of noise lately. Whatssup?

    They know that Bush won't do anything about their nuclear blackmail threats because he's too busy with his personal vendetta against Saddam who has no nukes. These North Korean nuke war threats must be really frustrating for Bush because they enable people to recognize how much bigger a threat North Korea is to the US with its nuclear ICBM's than relative non-threat, non-nuclear Iraq
  • CNN- NORTH KOREA EXPELS UN WEAPONS INSPECTORS

    12/27/2002 1:45:48 PM PST · 134 of 144
    rightwing2 to Lunatic Fringe; Theodore R.; belmont_mark
    CNN- NORTH KOREA EXPELS UN WEAPONS INSPECTORS

    Why isn't Bush willing to do anything about the North Korean threat? Could it be because he doesn't want any destractions from his bid to get rid of Sadam?
  • Don Feder Gets Trenchant On The Lott Affair

    12/27/2002 1:42:08 PM PST · 115 of 118
    rightwing2 to Theodore R.
    Also South Yemen fell under Carter. Isn't it called something else now? Isn't it amazing how many people today extol HST despite the dismal facts of his sorry administration? And in that category are many, many Republicans!!!!

    Amazing indeed. You are correct--South Yemen fell under Carter and North Yemen fell under Bush Sr. in 1990 when the South Yemenese took over the whole. They remain aligned with North Korea and the terrorist world to this day as demonstrated by the latest North Korean shipment of missiles to Yemen which was allowed by the US to reach its destination. Another cave by the Administration toward North Korea and the Yemenese.
  • Don Feder Gets Trenchant On The Lott Affair

    12/26/2002 6:55:49 PM PST · 112 of 118
    rightwing2 to Theodore R.; belmont_mark
    It was under Carter, am I not right, that more countries fell to communism than other any president since FDR?

    Actually, I think Truman beats Carter (and FDR) easy. Under Truman, all of the nations of Eastern Europe fell to Communism as did mainland China and North Korea which like Eastern Germany, Manchuria and northern Japan was awarded to the Soviets by FDR/Truman. Angola, Mozambique and South Vietnam fell to Communism under President Ford. Carter lost Nicaragua, Ethiopia, Afghanistan plus Iran to the ayatollahs. By any measure either in number of countries or in their combined population, Truman lost more to the Communists than any other US President.
  • Don Feder Gets Trenchant On The Lott Affair

    12/25/2002 9:47:25 AM PST · 109 of 118
    rightwing2 to belmont_mark; Theodore R.
    Not to mention his abject failure to capitalize on the opportunity to spank the Communists 1951 - 1953 by crossing the Yalu River and continuing right on to Beijing! Then was the time to assert ourselves, before the PRC had nukes. Since we missed that opportunity, naturally, not if, but when we go to war with the PRC, the US and West will suffer, at a minimum, tens of millions dead, and possibly, worst case, if the PRC are part of an anti-Western Axis, over 1 billion dead! Truman was the idiot I blame for what we will likely face in my lifetime!

    Most people fail to remember how very weak the Communist Chinese were militarily in 1950. You may recall that the main PLA weapon of the time was human wave tactics, because the only conceivable military advantage over the US they had was in terms of manpower. They remained much inferior in terms of weaponry. It was then that MacArthur talked of removing the US Seventh Fleet blockade in the Taiwan Straits and allow Chiang's Nationalist Army to reinvade southern China to pin them down and prevent their effective intervention in northern Korea.

    A two pronged invasion of China with the US landing in the north and the one million strong Nationalist Army landing in the south would have succeeded in liberating China from Mao and his butchers, but that is not necessarily what MacArthur was advocating. He just wanted to bomb the Chinese staging bases, railheads and bridges on the other side of the Yalu, which had he been allowed to do, the Chinese would have been unable to intervene in force to prevent the total collapse of their North Korean allies. I don't believe the West will suffer a billion dead, but I do believe that war between the US and a much strengthened nuclear PRC is inevitable and that millions of Americans may well pay the ultimate price for Truman's and Marshall's betrayal of over 600 million of our Free Chinese allies to the Communists.
  • Don Feder Gets Trenchant On The Lott Affair

    12/25/2002 9:38:54 AM PST · 108 of 118
    rightwing2 to Theodore R.; Sawdring; belmont_mark; Gunrunner2; IronJack; DoughtyOne; Enemy Of The State; ...
    As I recall, it was the HST State Department that deliberately withheld supplies that Congress had voted for the Nationalist Chinese. This action, akin to treason under the later Iran-Contra rules, sealed the fate of the anti-communists in China. The State Department claimed that Chiang was "corrupt." Also many uninformed Americans and forgetful politicians (like Goldwater and Reagan) seemed to overlook the scandals that plagued the HST administration. And HST was the originator of the "no-win war." We are still paying the price for his poor Korean strategy. Even this week, North Korea is threatening to blow up the world. No, a reasonable reading of history refutes the greatness of HST. That is why I have never been "wild about Harry."

    Your historical analysis is exactly correct. In 1947, the Nationalists under Christian leader Chiang Kai Shek were in complete control of mainland China outside of Soviet occupied Manchuria which was being used as a base for the Soviets to arm and train Mao's Red Army for the next stage of the war. Then the Red Army invaded China once again and the US Congress voted to provide the Nationalist freedom fighters with $1 billion in direct military assistance. Truman refused to provide this aid for 11 months while the Free Chinese Armies were immobilized by pro-Communist General George C. Marshall's order to withhold all military and logistical assistance including fuel and ammunition. In fact, Marshall even ordered a lot of the weapons sent by Congress including tanks, artillery and aircraft dumped into the sea.

    As a result of Truman's and Marshall's treachery, Chiang's Christian led armies were routed by the godless Maoist hordes and mainland China was plunged into what has been 53 years of darkness which has exacted the toll of more than 60 million innocent Chinese murdered by the Butchers of Beijing who the US government under Bush Jr. continues to financially and diplomatically support in power. Finally, as you stated had Truman not fired MacArthur and refused to allow him to win the war in Korea and forestall ChiCom military intervention, over 30,000 American lives would have been spared and Korea would be united, democratic and free today. More importantly we would not be faced with incessant threats of nuclear war from a nuclear ICBM armed Communist North Korea today. As I stated, contrary to the whitewashed revisionist history books, Truman was an unmitigated disaster for US foreign policy and resistance to Communist agression worldwide.