Bush and the Media ("New tone" will cause 43 to lose)

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/printlc20031001.shtml ^ | 10/1/03 | Linda Chavez

[Swanks]

Who's going to be the Ross Perot that siphones off 20 million votes from the Republicans?

No need for that in 2004. Bush's H1-B stance and pi** poor atitude to loss of 3.3M jobs is enough to lose 20M votes without a candidate to siphon them off.

Bush can go back to his scrub brush farm in Tx. Another 4 years of him in the WH and we'll all be bankcrupt.

[PhiKapMom]

You are preaching to the choir with me -- I have been complaining for months! Time to take the gloves off and fight back. You cannot set a new tone in D.C. when the media/RATs have "zero" integrity.

I want the George W. Bush that took on Ma Richards and gave her no quarter! I get the same updates and I am tired of "NICE" -- very tired!!!!!!!

We had harder hitting articles by RNC earlier in the year -- want those back!

[NYC Republican]

I agree Frist is a disaster, but I think Hastert has been quietly effective. You certainly can't blame the House for failing to move most of the conservative agenda forward.

The House has been a great asset, but Hastert, as a leader, and a vocal and visible proponent on Bush's policies, has been sub-par at best...

By the way, don't underestimate FReepers and our intuitive senses, yourself included... Rove and co. are magnificent strategizers, but they aren't all knowing... I really feel that if they wait too long to counter-attack, it may be too late.

[Consort]

Wasn't this Daddy Bush's problem? His failure or reluctance to step into the campaign fray? If I remember correctly, George Bush's re-election push was lackluster at best.

Again, when Daddy Bush lost, you lost, we lost, the country lost — big time. Don't let it happen again.

[w_over_w]

Now I'll wait for you to ignore all these statements, which directly answer your question, and go straight to other areas which you're ticked off about. And in the end, if you look at the big picture, you'll realize how silly it would be to not re-elect this man.

ROFLOL! I want to party to with you . . . but that would probably violate patient/client privilges. ;^)

[PhiKapMom]

You remember 1992 correctly! He let Clinton define him with his lies and spin and didn't answer back until it was too late. They had the goods on Clinton and didn't use them.

I would expect that when the RAT nominee becomes clearer, you will see a different Pres Bush and he will be more forceful -- hard to get into the fray with so many RAT candidates -- want to keep your powder dry. If it is Hillary, I guarantee you that the George W Bush you see will give her the same no quarter he gave Ma Richards -- she will be history.

What is bothering me is the Republicans that are on these cable news shows -- I want our hard hitting types like Jeff Sessions, Don Nickles, Jim Inhofe, etc., not the fluff we are getting. Our Senators and Reps should be out there defending the President not being wishy washy and silent!

[vikingcelt]

Why would that be stupid?

[LS]

I know the natural tendency is to want to respond, respond, respond, and attack, attack, attack. But the public simply is NOT paying attention, nor will it for months. Freepers always think "these things are taking a toll," but having worked in research over elections and so forth, it is highly unlikely 95% of the public can even NAME Joseph Wilson. They have a general sense of prosperity or lack thereof---not even really so much jobs. I think by mid-04, the economy will be back in a strong (not booming, but strong) prosperity mode, unemployment will be inching down, and that this will be reflected in polls. Meanwhile, the WH cannot attempt to counter every little fire. Save your ammo for the real campaign.

Remember, we saw a 2-3% Bush lead in 2000 disappear in one weekend with a badly-timed DUI news. They won't let that happen again.

[Coop]

ROFLOL! I want to party to with you . . . but that would probably violate patient/client privilges. ;^)

Am I being treated, or are you?

[lawgirl]

I think W should wait to see who his opponent is going to be before he starts spending a ton of money. Let the Dims each other- if he attacks, they unite to attack him, not to eliminate each other. Let their primary races get really hot so they can spend a lot of money on that and not have a lot left in the coffers to fight W.

he's doing what he needs to be doing- his job

[Coop]

Well said.

[RightWhale]

This problem with the CIA leak is BIG. Unless it is resolved immediately, there will be somebody else in the White House after '04. Do the Republicans have somebody warming the bench waiting to come into the game at short notice? Based on Republican Party organizational skills, it would seem not.

[bluebunny]

I have never understood why the GOP does not use Nickles more. He has the attractive Midwestern look, well-spoken, knows the issues. If he leaves the Senate, it is going to be a BIG LOSS. He would have been more effective that Frist, I believe.

[Starboard]

I as a lifelong Republican would not for GWB. There is no democrat I would consider voting for either. I would not mark that part of the ballot.

So then you are indifferent to someone like Howard Dean becoming president. You really need to think about this a little more.

[Stallone]

Totally agree.

This bullsh#t tone is the continuation of years of pious and polite nerds who ran the GOP.

Get this.

You are either streetwise and willing to fight, or you are a loser. Period.

But now, WARRIOR FREEPERS RULE THE EARTH.

They saved the 2000 election.

They are winning California.

And if W. doesn't learn, we will find a leader who does get it.

Intelligence, morality, kindness are all secondary principles in political warfare.

Of course we will choose the good guys, but does that mean we have to fight lies, deception and shamelessness with a thesaurus and a flower, instead of an Uzi?

Arnold Schwarzenegger is far more important to this party than most of the purists will ever understand.

McNaders are as much an impediment to the success of the future of the GOP as the 'Rats.

[mrtysmm]

Don't place too much credibility with Morris. He has to keep his name in lights, therefore he will say anything to sound relevant.

[mrtysmm]

And your alternative suggestion is? Your spiteful withholding of a vote for Bush is a vote for all you should despise.

[jmc813]

-He's embarassed the impotent and terrorist-enabling United Nations.

By rejoining UNESCO?

-He has (more indirectly than directly) put in place a pro-2nd amendment atmosphere, though I think Sept. 11th gets much of the credit. But the NRA is pleased with its gains over the past three years, including several concealed carry laws.

At his point, despite my differences with his domestic policy, I fully intend to vote for President Bush next year. If, however, he signs the AWB extension, I will do my best to see that he is not reelected. This is probably a non-issue, being that I'd be really surprised if the bill got through the House.

[Porterville]

The dems are buisy killing each other, let them wear each other out then release the big guns on the surviving 3; Look, Davis and Busta are killing each other one week outside of the CA election, dems are easy targets because they are soooo greeedddy.

[Catspaw]

Don't place too much credibility with Morris. He has to keep his name in lights, therefore he will say anything to sound relevant.

I remember election night in 1998, with Morris on Fox News predicting the GOP would pick up 30-50 seats, despite the returns already coming in proving otherwise.

Since that time, I take everything Morris says with a grain of salt.