Posted on 08/29/2002 1:00:30 PM PDT by feelin_poorly
She did catch you in a lie and it isnt my fault that you are a woman and mother...
...I'm sure your poor husband is happy you're back online.
I keep seeing this scene from the movie "Arthur" when he goes to see [Linda] Liza Minelli at her apartment and he knocks on a door that's answered by a screaming Woman...
...Arthur walks outside and says "Harry, you're a dead Man Harry."
LOL
And more to the point, wheter Browne is pulling sour grapes or not, the question is, does he make some valid observations and criticisms about the Bush administration? I'd say; yes. And my assertion has nothing to do with him being a Libertarian or member of any particular political party. It has to do with him being right.
When you loose the ability to critisize your own, you may as well throw in the towel. Its over. The Cult of Personality mindset will be in place, and nothing that the person in questions says or does will ever be questioned.
You know, I used to wonder how Germans could follow Hitler in 1932 and up through 1936. They were smart, educated, technical, worldly, and still they followed.
Now I know.
Anyway, it's called Crest Whitestrips and some people really need to use them. Alan Keyes obviously doesn't have a problem with crusty looking teeth--and I appreciate that.
As I'm sure so are Hill and Billery Krintoon, Fidel Castro, Sharpton, Jackson, Boxer, Daschale, Ted Kennedy, Hussein, etc., etc., ad naseum. My point was that we can't always discount the message just due to the messenger. What is YOUR point?
Tons of people do it and YOU need to relax.
Yeah, that's what humbletheFiend used to say. Or was it ned? Dunno, I get confused....
Are you referring to Jefferson's attacks on them without congressional authorization...
Jefferson's attacks on them with congressional authorization but without a general declaration of war...
Or Madison's attacks on them after a general declaration of war by congress?
The biggest reasons for McCain doing well were, IMHO, his war record and the amount of positive media coverage he received. Quite a few Independents also jumped into the GOP primaries to support him since he was considered an "outsider" (and to screw up the GOP primary by voting for the most liberal guy).
Once his real record was exposed, his support dropped.
Bush was always the front runner due to name recognition. As early as 1998, he was being pushed by the GOP elites solely due to his name recognition. I was fairly active in GOP politics (at the grassroots level) in 2000, and as such got to speak to quite a few Republicans. Many of them liked Keyes or Forbes better than Bush, but believed the lie anyone except for Bush was "unelectable". (As for this point, I'm thankful that Republicans in 1980 had enough backbone to support the "unelectable" Reagan)
As such, Bush took an early lead in the primaries. In a (successful) effort to get conservatives motivated behind him, he adopted a conservative platform of tax cuts, vouchers, and social security privatization.
In a nutshell, he won because he was the party's "annointed one", because he convinced people that he was a real conservative, and conservatives were so desperate to have the corrupt Clinton/Gore regime out of DC, that they voted for the guy that was presented to them as the most electable.
Try defending the article.
I don't know what "wether" means, its not in the dictionary.
Sorry about being the spelling police but sometimes my alter ego "the asshole" just jumps out.
You don't want to talk about OBL, I suggest you tell Harry the Rat to stop inserting him in his delusions. Otherwise it's not a red herring Alan, it's red meat.
I prefer the basic black and simple New York look.
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.