Posted on 11/04/2004 5:55:35 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Saw Donald Trump on Fox and Friends this morning. Asked what you do when you have defeated your opponent, do you make nice, extend an olive branch...etc... He said CRUSH THEM. ~I Agree~ .. The Senate must seize on this opporunity, and NOT squander another session trying to be liked by the likes of Pelosi, Kennedy, etc. Everytime a hand was extended, the bit and spit. So.. GOVERN ON PUBBIES!
What I hear coming from the dems is, to my mind, hilarious. They are saying, essentially, you won so you had better reach out to us and give us some power or we will continue to pout and obstruct. They sound like 7 year olds.
They know we don't have to reach out, that they need to compromise or be dismissed.
As I recall, Bush has a much more decisive victory that Clinton EVER had.
I SURE DON'T REMEMBER ALL OF THIS "DIVIDED NATION" & "UNITY" LOAD OF C R A P WHEN HE WAS ELECTED. Does anyone?
Every time I hear the drivel about we have to be more accomodating to them, I think to myself "come toward the light."
No. In 2000 when Bush won (and yes, he did win), the media and RATS went on and on that Bush didn't have a mandate and needed to reach out to them. In 2004, he does have a mandate and their saying the same exact thing.
Now they appeal to the goodness of George W. Bush - a goodness and compassion that is foreign to them.
It is somewhat galling after their non-stop insults and attacks on him and his agenda.
Good Article ~ Thanks!
We have to give Specter the hook, quick.
Be polite and smile, but get the agenda into motion. Change cloture rules in the Senate and get conservative judges on the bench.
If deep inroads in the courts are made early, the mass of the electorate will forget all about it in four years. Only the crazoids will rave about the long-term consequences. Weaning the nation from the myriad of social entitlements is a long-term project that will take time and deliberation.
It will also be necessary to secure judicial rulings that certain relics of leftist machinery in government are unconstitutional before going forward with dismantling. We'll want full participation from all branches before implementation of hot-button changes.
The war on terror is critical. But some issues, like the appointment of decent judges who follow the constitution, are even more important. In fact, these two things go together, because Bush has a duty to defend our families and our country just as he has a duty to defend our unborn children.
The Democrats have torn up our traditional society and tried to destroy it. Bush's job must be to repair it. There can be no compromise on issues of right and wrong, good and evil, life and death.
Yes, they need to get out of the way of reform. That is the clear message of this election. Their loyal opposition and input into the construction of legislation is welcome. But obstruction by witholding cloture is like taking the ball and going home when one is losing.
You can bet, though that they'll save their hot-air for Supreme Court nominees. I'm hoping Bush will pick really well respected strict constructivists, and fight like hell if they try to Bork them.
If they had won there would have been no talks of not having a mandate, no talks of "healing divisions"
As expected its just the usual set of tricks they pull when they lose. Hopefully the republicans won't fall for it this time.
Precisely. They either work with this Administration or they spend 4 years on an ash heap.
Excellent! May it be so.
Political unity, indeed, is not an important goal in its own right. In fact, I view our country as UNITED. Yes, we have strong disagreements between the right and the left. But millions of us got out to the polls and voted. We woke up the next day and, for the most part, accepted the results. America rolls on, the greatest nation on earth.
Political disagreement is not the same thing as national division.
No. Clinton was the "end of gridlock." When they have power, we're obstructionists; when we have power, we're a divided nation and owe it to them for the sake of "unity" to do things their way anyway.
There is a good portion of Kerry's voters who are beyond hope, totally obsessed with their hatred of Bush, but there are many people who voted for Kerry who did so because they were swayed by the Democrats' rhetoric or unhappy with the situation in Iraq, but who earlier admired Bush's handling of the situation after 9/11. By standing true to what he believes in but in a non-arrogant way, Bush can win some of those people over.
I've never seen Bush as arrogant.
Remember after his first election, when the opposition's collective jaw dropped because Bush had the "nerve" to put into action the things he had campaigned on?
To them that was arrogant.
You can't please people like that, nor should you have to.
They lost.
We won.
And the president has been given a green light to move the conservative agenda forward.
He'll do it as he has all along, govern in a compassionate-conservative way that keeps America's interests front and center.
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.