Posted on 11/15/2004 4:43:32 AM PST by Chairman_December_19th_Society
We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail!
Good morning!!
Do not let the victims of the attacks on New York and Washington, nor the brave members of our Nation's military who have given their lives to protect our freedom, die in vain!!
Members of the other party still don't get it.
As Republicans, we are reviled by that other American party for having the temerity to insist that America stand tall among the great nations of the world.
As Republicans, we are reviled by that other American party for having the temerity to insist that America have the right to defend herself.
As Republicans, we are reviled by that other American party for having the temerity to insist that no other country in the world be able to dictate how this Nation will protect itself.
And that's just for starters.
The other party would have it so that criminals are understood rather than punished. The other party would have it so that success financially is punished rather than rewarded. The other party wants to prohibit Americans from using our own country's natural resources to maintain and maybe improve our standard of living. The other party would rather see terrorists set free from Guantanamo than our soldiers be successful in wiping the scourge from the planet.
That is the Great American Left! That is the crowd that believes the United Nations is better than the United States.
In the campaign just concluded we heard that President Bush failed in the Iraq War because he didn't have a plan for the peace. First, it must be said that the author of this piece was, in retrospect, a bit slow in fashioning the correct response, but as they say "better late than never." The only reason the charge was made was because there wasn't peace, but if the war concludes, then we won't need a plan for the peace because, guess what folks, we will have peace!
In that same campaign, it was offered that average Americans pay too little tax, and rich Americans not enough. This is the view of the Great American Left. Truth is, Washington spends too much.
Now, the Great American Left would offer that we simply didn't understand their message. If we were to learn the nuances of what they offer, we would all genuflect in their direction, realize their majesty, and offer them the scepter of power from now until eternity. Or, at least this is the view of Nancy Pelosi--House MINORITY Leader.
Well, Nancy, here's something for you to ponder. We have heard your message. We Americans have learned the Great American Left wants to take our money and to leave us more poor, more weak, and more dead.
The Great American Left would rather pay out grants for studies to determine the root causes of crime than to provide guns, bullets, and body armor to our brave kids fighting to save Iraq and the world from terrorists.
The Great American Left would rather see that the Geneva Conventions apply to Al Qa'eda members even though these people are not military members and have no reservations about completely ignoring the rules of war on their part.
The Great American left sees a comity of nations that cowtow to the great United Nations. The United Nations, however, is completely unaccountable to the people of the world. Has anyone on the planet actually stood in an election for a representative to the UN? No. They are appointed by governments of countries--the sovereign voice of the various people. But the Great American Left, in their blind hatred of the regime ancien in this country, desire their leadership.
The Great American left would have us believe that the collective security offered by the United Nations would protect us, even though most of the Nation's in the UN either simply don't care about us, or are our sworn enemies (Cuba comes to mind).
The Great American left operates on the notion that the only way to deal with countries and groups that threaten us is to appease them--sort of like giving the class bully your lunch money in the hopes that he won't pound you, today.
That's the Great American Left.
And that's why they are not right.
Under leadership offered by President Bush, American has, thankfully, not been attacked since September 11, 2001.
Many of Al Qa'eda's elements are in less than perfect working order. Some parts aren't even working at all (for you folks on the left--that means DEAD!).
Terrorists in Iraq are on the run. It is not a good thing to be a terrorist and be sent to that country right now.
Lybia has agreed to give up its WMD program, and just this morning it has been anounced in the papers that Iran now has agreed to freeze its nuclear program.
The American economy is expanding and adding new jobs at a healthy clip.
But in the end, maybe we'll acknowledge one argument of the Great American Left--ok, maybe George W. Bush wasn't elected in 2000. That would mean that he can stand for and win re-election in 2008.
Nancy Pelosi--America has heard the message of the Great American Left. America understands that message, very clearly.
That is why George W. Bush is President, and Senator Tom Daschle is going home.
For AMERICA - The Right Way, I remain yours in the Cause the Chairman.`
:-)
Well, I bit, big time. Thanks for the link.
Yah hooey!! What a great convention.
I'm getting ready to close it down here and go watch some football.
Agreed; a media made problem.
Bless you for keeping me on this ping list. Wish I had time to visit -- this thread has some of the nicest people!
Easy solution.. after one kills the "nice prisoner" , the gun goes to the other terrorist. the one with the tape recorder, the dig cams & notebooks. Most of these embeds do much more harm than good.
there is a thread on this
It's interesting about the embeds. On one hand, it's probably better to have them embedded to prevent so many gaggles of reporters running around together, getting into trouble being in places they aren't supposed to be. Sort of a "hold your friends close and your enemies closer" mentality.
OTOH, having them at all provides the sort of video that we will be seeing for some weeks now. Our guys could do their jobs more easily without having to be concerned with being recorded. We won't be going back to those days though. The court of public opinion won't allow it. And as much as I hate the unfair standards that our guys are held to in stark comparison to the barbarism of the enemy, that IS reality.
Agree with much of what you say. Unfortunately, that just doesn't seem to be our reality. Yes, the press has caused military as well as civilian casualties. OBL couldn't have a more willing friend.
You have given me a great idea for a party. An inauguration party. I will start the wheels turning tomorrow.
I read ATRW every day and have occasionally added my comments. I am reading "The Last Lion Alone - 1932-1940." It was writen by William Manchester and published in 1988. It tells, in great detail, the appeasement of the British people before the second world war and Churchill's frustration, but determination, to change things. Stanley Baldwin and the Parliament were unbelievable in their appeasement towards Hitler. Churchill's dogged determination finally saved England (with our help). It is very interesting and reminds me of President Bush's vision and determination.
Bummer.. I was looking forward to meeting you face to face..
Parties are fun to plan though...
Hi thanks for "dropping by" and sharing with us. I am hit & miss her most of the time, but the folks here are friendly & helpful & the topics go all over the board.
There are many avid readers here & I am sure your recommendation will be noted by many.
Welcome FReeper FRiend....
It is difficult yet to have much perspective on Bush's freshly minted reelection victory, but it may well rank among the most extraordinary Republican campaigns ever. Confronting bad news almost daily, a ferocious attack by a united Left, and a hostile press corps, Bush won a resounding victory. His campaign was strategically brilliant and technically proficient, correctly assessing the nature of the electorate and election from the beginning and acting on its knowledge with great tactical verve. It built a grassroots force that, had it been marshaled on behalf of a liberal, would be celebrated as a great "people's army." It creatively found a way around the establishment press. And it brought home a win that could be a long-term boon to conservative ideas.The strategy and the tone were set at the top, by the president most importantly, and by the aide he has dubbed "the architect," Karl Rove. They created a team that was cohesive and disciplined, and carried out from beginning to end a plan toward one goal: a victory that would build a second-term mandate. "The president is one who believes in building a mandate — always has," says Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie. "That's what elections are for." It was not to be an empty Reagan 1984 or Clinton 1996 reelection.
The basic conception of the campaign never changed. Early on, Bush pollster Matthew Dowd explains, "we realized that 90 to 92 percent of the country were aligned, and only about 7 to 8 percent were swing voters or independent voters. That was a big thing for us to notice and model the campaign on." It dictated two strategic insights. One was that there would have to be an emphasis on the Republican base. After 9/11, the Bush team saw that levels of GOP support for the president were going to stay at historic highs, which would allow them to maximize turnout. "He has stronger support among Republicans than Reagan," Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman says, "and the Republican base is 10 points bigger than it was then." Dowd says a presidential campaign traditionally spends 85 to 90 percent of its resources chasing swing voters. The Bush campaign instead roughly split its resources between the base and swing voters. "We knew if we turned out our base, we could split independent voters or lose them slightly, and still win," Dowd says.
The other insight was that — as a function of the division in the country — Bush's job approval would probably neither dip to a level where it would be impossible for him to win, nor rise to a level where victory would be easily assured. Bush would exist in what Dowd calls an "in-between world" for an incumbent — higher than losers like Carter, lower than winners like Reagan. This meant that the election would not be entirely defined by attitudes toward the incumbent, as the Kerry campaign hoped and as many other presidential elections had been. It would be a choice between two candidates, making it especially important for the Bush team to define Kerry as unacceptable.
John I am atnticipating you connecting with us here via your laptop from some airport terminal...
hope the trip is going well & you feel satisfied with it all. didn't realize it was an early thanksgiving.. You had mentioned "quick" trip & then mentioned having the GOOD knives for carving thanksgiving bird. So thought you would be there through t-giving.
To me 2 weeks is a long luxurious time, but then again each person's idea of "quick" is different. Yours was truly a quick trip
I am so jealous about the keynote speakers. I love former President Bush, I was absolutey heartbroken when he lost in 1992. But I do believe things have worked out quite well.
Darn. I was thinking about going back for the festivities in DC in January, but I have a big deadline at work. That's OK though, I really don't have the money right now to go.
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.