Get Real! Cut the Third Party Crap: The Two Parties Are Not the Same

Rush ^ | December 1st | rush

[stephenjohnbanker]

I got a certain person here not to post to me about 3 weeks ago, and that I would do the same. You guys are wasting your time. When one person calls you every name in the book, without backing up a single solitary post, and then plays the long suffering victim, where do you think you can go with it?
My blood pressure says move on to a more fruitful thread or poster.

[mkjessup]

mkjessup, no more harrassment. rabscuttle, if you want to have discussions of issues, that's fine with me. If you want to attack me personally, forget it. (You at least have the self-discipline that mk lacks).

Charming to the last.


"I understand that both of you have the sole criteria for conservatism as being a disdain for George W. Bush which I do not now, nor will ever share with you."

In that case, may the Farce be with you.

Happy Kwanza.

[mkjessup]

My blood pressure says move on to a more fruitful thread or poster.

The occasional game of Whack-A-Mole can be amusing, lol

[ohioWfan]

I wasn't trying to be "charming." I was being factually accurate. You have posted to me a zillion times (hyperbole) with the sole intent of harrassing me, exhibiting a tremendous lack of discipline. I'm not sure why you would try to deny it, when it's right here for all to see.

I do appreciate your calling me a mole, however, and once again revealing that you are not interested in political discussion, but rather name calling.

Now if I were dishonest, I would deny my respect and admiration for President Bush, who deserves it for his honor, integrity, character, courage and his work as Commander in Chief.

But I won't do that, because I really am completely honest.

And I am also in the process of finding out if I am "officially" considered a RINO for that reason alone, and if you are given tacit permission to harrass simply on that basis.

It's going to be interesting for me to find out.

btw, my photos from the 9-12DC Tea Party were awesome, weren't they? Did you check out all the signs I chose to take photos of? Hope so.

You should have been there, mk. It was an adrenaline rush for at least a week afterwords for all of us who were there. Amazing experience to protest statism on Capitol Hill. Amazing!

[ohioWfan]

Obama at -16 today in the Rasmussen polls today.

Keep up the good work, fellow conservatives! We're moving the boy down with our voices and our efforts.

More letters. More calls. More word of mouth. More protests.

KEEP UP THE PRESSURE ON THE MARXISTS! We can WIN this, if we work together. YES,we CAN! ;)

[ohioWfan]

[ohioWfan]

OK, that's weird. Would you mind removing that last post, Admin Mod. I have NO idea what that means, but I obviously did something wrong.

Oops! :)

[mkjessup]

And I am also in the process of finding out if I am "officially" considered a RINO for that reason alone, and if you are given tacit permission to harrass simply on that basis.

I have this suspicion that you could be walking down the street, and some stranger might look cross eyed at you, and you would believe they were 'harassing' you.

As for your blind loyalty to GWB, I recall that when I was much much younger, that I (like many Americans and no doubt many American youth) fell hook, line & sinker for the idea that JFK was the "good" guy in that long ago election of 1960, and it wasn't until later that not only did I learn that my perception of JFK was totally wrong, but that he (and the 'Rat Party) had stolen the election from then Vice President Richard Nixon (who had not yet blossomed into his own version of 'RINO', manifested after his eventual win in '68).

I learned that for all of the polished public appearances, the eloquent speeches (some of which have credence even today), only reflected JFK's aspirations, and not necessarily his performance.

First of all? He sold out the Cuban people at the Bay of Pigs, and thereafter sealed the deal after the Soviets allegedly removed their IRBMs from Cuba by pledging not to overthrow Castro.

Second, JFK chose to play politics with the XB-70 bomber, supporting it on the '60 campaign trail, accusing the Eisenhower Administration of being weak on defense, but after being sworn in, JFK canceled the program, and his idiot Defense Secretary (Robert Strange McNamara) went on to royally screw things up in the military establishment and of course mismanaged our efforts in Vietnam and turned a war that could have been easily won into the slow motion train wreck that we all remember.

Third, was the cancellation of the Skybolt GAM-87 missile, a system that our UK allies had staked their entire deterrent capability upon, JFK tossed it in the trash on the advice of (again) that idiot McNamara. (Skybolt would have given our B-52 fleet the capability of standing off from their targets instead of having to penetrate deep into Soviet airspace, long before the Tomahawk cruise missile came along.)

There are many more examples but the point of all this is that in my own idealistic youth, I believed that JFK could do no wrong, that everything he had done was carefully thought through, that his Administration was indeed made up of the 'best and brightest', blah-blah, lah-dee-dah. His untimely death sealed his image and made him nearly unassailable by critics. But I had my eyes opened, and I realized that JFK was ill-prepared for the Presidency he assumed in January 1961, and it was due to his own lack of gravitas that the Soviets sought to test him by putting missiles in Cuba. Everyone generally agrees that we came within a hair of nuclear war and yet the unspoken truth is that had the Soviets been dealing with fervent anti-Communist President Richard M. Nixon in 1960, they would have never dared their Cuban missile gambit.

The fact is, George W. Bush (prior to 0bama) was one of the least experienced men to ever seek and attain the Presidency. Did he rise to the occasion after 9/11? Yes indeed he did and I give him full props and credit for that. However his actions while President were far and away those of a LIBERAL, expanding the federal government, infringing upon civil liberties, spending and spending like there was no tomorrow, and the smoking gun in all of this were his words to his speechwriter preparing that text for an address at CPAC early last year, when GWB informed that speechwriter that "there was no movement" (conservative movement) and that HE had "redefined the Republican Party".

And we know how he redefined it, from the Party of Reagan to the Party of RINOS, and we are all paying the price for his political expediency.

You will eventually need to come to grips with that oWf, because George W. Bush was no conservative. Not by any standard.

And he got it honestly from his RINO 'New World Order' old man, George Herbert Walker Bush, the ONLY major political mistake that Ronald Reagan ever made.

[mkjessup]

It means that for some reason, the source website from which you were trying to link to one of their images, detected and blocked the attempt.

You might try using ImageShack.us, I find it very reliable and easy to upload images to.

[ohioWfan]

Thanks.

[mkjessup]

Anytime.

[sickoflibs]

Did we miss anything while we were gone? Is Obama still president? Is america still here?

:)

[Impy]

I think I suffered from cognitive dissonance with Bush. I just stopped thinking about it until it just hit me sometime in 2008. At that point I felt bad for having had blind loyalty to a President just cause he was a Republican. I grew up hating that slmeball Clinton and it was so nice to have a Republican. Ugh.

But I learned some things. For one don’t give ANY pol blind loyalty.

[mkjessup]

Did we miss anything while we were gone? Is Obama still president? Is america still here?

0bama is still usurping the Office of the Presidency, so as I see it, he was never President, and America (what's left of our Republic) is still here. ;)

[mkjessup]

In the meantime, it's already an oldie but a goodie:

[sickoflibs]

Thanks Impy, my experience too.

[Victoria Delsoul]

Then along came Sarah, who represented our conservative positions down the line, and showed a willingness to fight and be true to conservatism that was refreshing and exciting.

I agree, and as you also mentioned "she has come back stronger and more resilient than ever, and holds in her hands the very real possibility that the GOP can and will be reformed." If there is hope for reforming the GOP, it is Sarah. She did it in Alaska when she went against the GOP elites who held power there for so long.  Sarah can use her popularity to bring home the message of smaller government that doesn't intrude on people's lives but also, doesn't encroach on our great institutions.  Further, she can articulate the value in putting an end to the bailouts and growing government ownership of businesses like GM.

The Obama healthcare debacle, not to mention the climate warming hoax, are predicated on people's welfare mentality: the belief that the government will take care of businesses, thus promoting irresponsible behavior and creating a cycle of dependency with major consequences for all of us.

As I said, the time is right to talk about cutting the size of government, and getting the government out of the private businesses, a policy that is destroying the free market and limiting freedom.

I think that there are many major issues that Sarah can use against Obama and bring discontented voters back into our tent. In a way she is already doing this, by speaking out against the death panels and Obama's policies of destruction via Twiter or whatever other method she chooses.

On another note, I wouldn't worry about the small fringe of "all or nothing" types. Their discontent as you can see isn't with Obama, and for that reason they are irrelevant in my book.  I believe Sarah can unify most conservatives against the real enemy – Obama.

[Victoria Delsoul]

Obama at -16 today in the Rasmussen polls today.

Music to my ears.

KEEP UP THE PRESSURE ON THE MARXISTS! We can WIN this, if we work together. YES,we CAN! ;)

Exactly. I don't spend my time attacking fellow conservatives, but I keep my eye on the real enemy. And all those who care about defeating the real enemy are doing whatever we can to make sure he doesn't win another election.

[Victoria Delsoul]

Judging by how some have tried to bully you on this thread, I would say someone took a pic of the unhappy gang commiserating, lol.

[rabscuttle385]

rabscuttle, if you want to have discussions of issues, that's fine with me.

In the words of one Joe Wilson...

YOU LIE!

You don't want to have a discussion about anything unless it's favorable to your idol, the RINO George W. Bush.

I have already presented you with facts, and I have even gone to the trouble of verifying some of those facts for you.

Your response was two-fold: one, you wrote that

None of what you said, even if it WERE all valid, negates my point.

which clearly implies that you believe that none of my points were true or valid; and two, you dismissed the verification of the aforementioned facts, using a mixture of sources from all across the political spectrum, as mere "encyclopedieas [sic] of propaganda."

So, ohioWfan, is Fox News considered "propaganda"? Or maybe World Net Daily? Or The Wall Street Journal? Or The Washington Examiner? All of these sources are considered sympathetic to conservative causes, yet you dismissed them as "propaganda."

I would surmise that, according to you, anything that doesn't fit your pre-conceived notion of George W. Bush or doesn't support your distorted perception of him is to be dismissed as "propaganda."

Furthermore, you insinuated that I myself am not grounded in "reality," writing:

That is an undeniable fact which your protestations cannot remove from the world of reality.

Anyways, you, in all cases, evaded having to actually rationally rebut the damning evidence I presented to you; instead, you engaged in ad hominem attacks on both mkjessup and myself, and in multiple cases you not only feigned knowledge of having talked to mkjessup on prior occasions but used gender-based slurs against him.

And, what's even worse, you engaged in political relativism, writing:

I will repeat......President Bush was conservative in many areas and did many conservative things.

SO WHAT?!

If Obama is "conservative" in many areas and manages to do many "conservative" things, will you defend him too, even as he does far more non-"conservative" things?

As far as I am concerned, you are either a RINO, an opportunist, or a GOP hack who is mentally unable to articulate anything beyond merely parroting the usual RNC/NRSC/NRCC talking points and, heck, maybe a few buzz words du jour. Irrespective, at best, you're completely useless to the conservative movement except as a warm body, and at worst, you just make the rest of us look like a bunch of hypocritical, partisan tools.

Oh, and mkjessup, these words are for you:

Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we are denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we are always "against" things, never "for" anything. Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.

Ain't it funny how every valid criticism of Bush, no matter how verifiable, is dismissed as "propaganda," or the individuals raising valid concerns are denounced as "Bush haters," out of touch with "reality," or suffering from "Bush Derangement Syndrome"?

Anyways, as far as I am concerned, anyone here on FR who willfully continues to defend Bush and his record is either stupid or a full-fledged RINO.