Posted on 08/17/2006 4:30:32 PM PDT by NapkinUser
It might end up as a referendum on "gay marriage" :)
"The Iraq war has been over for years. Its a peacekeepinf operation just like the one in Germany after the end of WWII. There is not a war going on in Iraq."
Yes and no. The "hot war" was over in 3 weeks and cost 130 lives. The low-level insurgency costs about 50 lives a month. So we have lost more men in Iraq in every three months of occupation than in the hot war.
" The fact the WH has allowed the subject of Iraq to keep coming up is a massive political failure."
Well, there is reality, and there is the MSM.
The reality is that there *is* a war on. Al Qaeda decided to make a stand in Iraq, which is why hundreds of Iraqi civilians are dying each month. The MSM is so eager to see Bush lose, they want to deliver PR victories to the terrorists. So daily acts of heroism by our guys and success and efforts in helping Iraq are ignored; only terrorist victories are reported.
"The WH should have quit talking about Iraq years ago and moved on." - As long as Cindy Sheehan is talking about it, it's bad political advice not to respond.
Maybe he's irritated at Kudlow because K is another well-heeled elite who doesn't think he should have to mow his own lawn nor pay a legal wage to have it done. I'm irritated, myself. The immigration issue is the one that will bring the GOP down, not something Pat once said about Bush the Elder. The country club crowd is sneering at Joe Sixpack, and the country club neos don't have their sons in Iraq.
If I could have the ear of the GOP leadership--and I can't, and I'm shortly going to stop hoping--it's this...Joe Sixpack is not at all stupid. He knows he's being sold out.
"Maybe he's irritated at Kudlow" .... because Kudlow is an OPTIMIST and these paleo-cons are allergic to thinking the world can improve!
Moroever ... Pat B. is another well-heeled elite who doesn't think he should have to mow his own lawn either.
Didnt Pat get into trouble for having a Benz while running around complaining about foreign car imports back in the days of presidential candidate runs?
"The country club crowd is sneering at Joe Sixpack, and the country club neos don't have their sons in Iraq."
It's smears like that which just add pointless venom to the debate. A lot of well-to-do reservists have been pulled into GWOT, and some who could afford to stay home - like Pat Tillman - have given the ultimate sarifice. It's interesting that the paleo-con right feels it necessary to engage in the kind of class warfare claptrap that is stock in trade of the left in order to make its point, whatever it is. And what the h*** does a comment like that have to do with immigration?
"The Democrats are determined to make the election of 2006 a referendum on Bush and the war in Iraq. And, as of now, that is how history will likely record it."
"It might end up as a referendum on "gay marriage" :)"
Even if it were such, the MSM will never admit that (unless and until the gays win). The 2006 elections will be a referendum on whatever the MSM decide, after the fact, it was about. If Conservatives win, it will something inconsequential, and be called a 'temper tantrum' or 'fear wins'. If Democrats win, it will be a big deal, and the End of Conservative Movement As We Know It will come about because of it.
"What the only difference between Mel Gibson's drunk rant and Pat's typical article? Pat's sober."
Are you sure?? :-)
"The issue is the judges and keeping the economy strong and the tax cuts pemanent. The GOP should do ok if they stick to those issues."
The MSM will make sure to remind people that Bush is to blame for all the world's ills, including unusual weather events.
Pat Buchanan blahh... he is simply noise to me and has been since he came out against da Joos.. (as someone above aptly put it)
And that's the call on it. I agree.
I'll take the pisser and the gall.
"Patty sounds more and more like a little boy with grudge. Did he get kicked out of a club?"
He either got kicked out, or left voluntarily.
But after his 2000 showing of 0.5 percent, he doesn't rate the ink he gets to print with.
In fact he wouldn't get published, except he usually opposes Bush. So he gets published.
He gets paid for getting published. He gets paid by liberals, for doing their work.
It is now his paycheck formula--an anti-Bush screed on schedule.
As for substance: He makes the dems talking points, weaving in his "neo-con" label.
Paycheck formula.
It comes down to trust and faith--and is why Bush's approvals stay sunk.
If a CEO says, "Sorry, I won't do my job. I'm just so attached to my maid and my dear friend Vicente. Not gonna protect our borders, our sovereignty, our people from the incoming crime wave. (19% of our Fedeeral prison is illegal) Won't happen. Too bad. Talk to the hand"--Kudlow was talking like this just a few weeks back, too. Just how much trust should I have in Bush him he's leading us to war? A CEO who says things like that ought to QUIT.
All those speeches, "We can do it. We can bring western democracy to a roiling, backwater, bloodthirsty collection of death-cult factions. But we also have to cede sovereignty to Mexico because I just can't be bothered to enforce the law...?."
Pat's support is much much higher. These results show how willing the Pat supporters are to vote for the main Republican candidate if they think it is needed. In 2000 GWB has won thanks to them, and in 2004.
Do you really want them so stay home in the next elections?
I'll stick with my assessment thank you. There is no war going on in Iraq. Its been over for years.
The MSM and Cindy Sheehan would not have any gained as much traction had the WH not been so political inept in handling the political aspects of Iraq by staying on the defensive in such a hunkered down manner. Bush should have moved on to push other programs and quick talking about Iraq years ago and recruited others to make whatever defense is needed. When asked about it he should have treated it like yesterday's news and stated it was an unqualified success on our part and said whether it lasts depends on Iraq etc etc Iraq was an unnecessary political failure.
It's a BS call that blames America for Russia being an anti-American troublemaker these days .. you think our meddling *made* Putin be an empire-building backstabber?!?
For shame! That's a 'blame America first' attitude.
These countries are causing us trouble because they dont like our freedom, our democracy and our power.
"The MSM and Cindy Sheehan would not have any gained as much traction if ... (insert Bush blame here)"
Er, the MSM puts out ink *every day*. They gain traction just be being persistent in their bias.
The idea that Bush could somehow win the argument on Iraq by saying nothing about it is incredible. It doesnt compute because it would leave the MSM alone to write the story (which they have done anyway, by ignoring what Bush *does* say).
I didn't say leave the MSM alone if you reread my post. It takes teams to win not just a President.
Democrats are socialists completely.. and so are most neocons.. The argument seems to be HOW to make America a totally socialist country not "IF"... That reality hides the democrats and neocons that are globalist also..
America is becomeing URPized..
"That is an accurate assessment of things happening as I view them.
Pat is a pretty smart guy, but he is somehow quite dysfunctional.
His reasoning has almost always seemed to me to be convoluted and inconsistent.
Certainly his "solutions" would not be in the best interests for posterity."
As far as foreign policiy goes, I'm willing to cut Bush a lot of slack given the difficult predicament he found himself, along with all the widespread MSM antagonism. However, nation-building does not seem to be working and perhaps needs to be preceded by nation-destroying. Islam just seems to be contaminating any attempts at constitutional govt. America had thousands upon thousands of pages of radical economics, politics, and philosophy - mixed with a revived Gospel message - as an underpinning for the great experiment with democracy. We're still having a hell of a time refining it, so how much more problems will people have whose underpinning is the Koran -give me a break! Unfortunately, Pat will never support Israel and would probably go to bed with the same Arab nations that he would accuse the Bush's of being in bed with. Israel is the first front on the war on Islamofascism, and as far as the "Neocon" gurus go, at least they support Bibi, whose the only answer for Israel right now.
As far as immigration, outsourcing, and bloated spending go, I'm having a hard time wondering how true conservatives can defend these policies, which are actually quite Clintonesque. I would definitely side with the minutemen on these lines. The common arguments in support of Bush's Clintonesque policies are that "Pat is against them." - not a very astute attack. It's not free trade with thousands of pages of stipulations, or if the trading partner is an authoritarian country. Free Trade presupposes two free traders. And we need Latin AMerican support in the future in our war against Islam, not Latin American communism.
So Pat, like many critics, brings up good points but he himself cannot be taken seriously because I don't trust his sollutions.
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.