Some Key Conservatives Uneasy About Bush

The Herald (Miami) ^ | Jul. 11, 2004 | SCOTT LINDLAW

[Darlin']

"Life ain't easy for a boy named "sue."

FOFLOL. Very good. :)

[F.J. Mitchell]

Dane- here since 1998, and has revealed nothing at all of a personal nature-not even continent of habitat.

[Mark in the Old South]

Re: "What's more amazing is that you seem to skip over each and every refutation of the latest "we hate Bush" bromide."

How on earth do you arrive at that conclusion. First off NO ONE on this thread has expressed a "HATE BUSH" bromide. I repeat NO ONE. Specific positions of the Bush administration have been criticized but not in a hateful manner. The same can not be said for the BUSH GOOD KERRY BAD crowd. By the way I like Bush far and away better than Kerry and I have said that before in this thread but it does not sink in. In my post that referred to Savage, I expressed reservations about him but that did not sink in either.

I feel I am talking to a wall. I give up, I might as well as talk to demoncrats for all the good it does. They pull the same stunts.

[Eva]

But nearly 150 conservatives listened in silence recently as a veteran of the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations ticked off a litany of missteps in Iraq by the Bush White House

Well, what would one expect of conservatives, boos and cat calls? Conservatives are restrained and polite, unlike their liberal counterparts.

[WOSG]

I agree that we shouldnt call mere opposition to Iraq War unAmerican. but ...

"We could have stopped Iraq from doing anything militarily with just our airpower."

How did our airpower stop Saddam from operating his two terrorist training camps (ie Salman Pak)?

How did our airpower stop his $10 billion oil-for-palaces corruption scheme to pay off terrorists and friendly companies and governments?

How did our airpower stop his violations of UN sanctions, his aquisition of banned missiles from RPNK, bio-weapons labs, etc.?

bottom line: Just as airpower doesnt win wars alone, it cant stop terrorist sponsorship and rogue nation's activities by itself.

We took the harder, but more certain and thorough approach to 100% deal with a threat. I'd take that over a 95% approach that still leaves 5% of nagging doubt as to what threat remained.

"We could have eliminated Saddam and his two boys without putting one single soldier on the ground in Iraq."

Possibly, but the Clinton admin made the coup plot of 1995 go FUBAR, and attempts to use missiles in mar 2003 failed, did they not. Saddam was a "hard target", if it was easy, we would have done it sooner.

[Deb]

Looks like the press toilet of lies is over-flowing as usual.

[Grey Ghost II]

He's (Specter) already collaborating with Democrats to block some Bush appointees. You call that control?

Well you are assuming issues really matter. Silly me, I thought it was all about getting votes and power, not actually standing up for one's principles.

[Mark in the Old South]

I was only pointing out the situation was not as clear cut as you seem to think. I do not know what is the best option a Pres. should take, but I do know the court is out of control. I do not expect you to agree. I am mindful that you support gay marriage. so when it comes to "I think you are a bit of a nutter. You are, aren't you?" I will consider the source.

[af_vet_1981]

"I don't think there's any question that there is growing restiveness in the Republican base about this war," said Halper, the co-author of a new book, "America Alone: The Neoconservatives and the Global Order." Ah. I see.

They don't like President Bush because they think he is Jewish ...

[Torie]

You know that your bashing of Bush on gay marriage and the fiat court and abortion was just bilge. Just come out and admit it. The best you could come up with, was suggesting that Bush go insane and get himself removed from office.

You can keep mentioning my public policy views on gay marriage all you want. It won't get you any traction on this site (those views are well known, as are my views that it should not be done by judicial fiat), but don't let that stop you. I know you find it new and exciting.

[Mark in the Old South]

Savage is not my fav, so I am hoping you are right. But it is the latest I have heard on the subject so I have nothing to disprove him (Savage).


The above is my post to another poster. Does this look like I put alot of faith in Savage?

[onyx]

Why bother to be rational when self righteous swill works so much better.




Precisely, and as Deb pointed out:

"What an asswipe. I knew he had to be a Richard Korb-type Reagan guy when he wrote "neoconservatives". A dead give-away we have a phony Republican lecturing us. Great find."

[EGPWS]

"It's costing us a lot of money, isolating us from our allies and friends," said Halper, who gave $1,000 to George W. Bush's campaign and more than $83,000 to other GOP causes in 2000. "This is not the cakewalk the neoconservatives predicted. We were not greeted with flowers in the streets."

What is your recommendation for achieving your perceived "cakewalk" Stefan?

How many attacks on our country would it take for you to change your attitude toward Dubyas line of thinking in keeping the war (and it is a war) overseas and not in our country?

[Deb]

Wishing Spector's loss in November shows how ignorant you are. Regardless of Spector's vote history his seat guarantees the GOP majority, which means Tom Daschle isn't in control of our government. That's huge...and it's the reason Bush and Santorum backed Arlen. When Jeffords jumped ship and became an "independent" he handed the reins to Daschle without even becoming a Democrat.

The balance of power in this struggle is the most important thing that can be imagined at this terrifying point in out history and even if President Bush doesn't have the luxury of a 60 vote Senate majority, at least Tom Daschle isn't in charge of setting the agenda.

Try reading up on how the government works before you attempt to make points.

[Dane]

Dane- here since 1998, and has revealed nothing at all of a personal nature-not even continent of habitat

UH, I don't change my screen names willy nilly. And have stated many times that I currently live in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area.

[Doohickey]

I see you're fighing a delaying action while waiting for the rest of your swarm to arrive. They'd better hurry, because you're losing.

[Joe Hadenuf]

We could have stopped Iraq from doing anything militarily with just our airpower. Anything even remotely deemed militarily offensive in nature could have been taken out at a moments notice. We could have eliminated Saddam and his two boys without putting one single soldier on the ground in Iraq.

How did our airpower stop Saddam from operating his two terrorist training camps (ie Salman Pak)?

Are you suggesting it couldn't have?

I>How did our airpower stop his violations of UN sanctions, his aquisition of banned missiles from RPNK, bio-weapons labs, etc.?

Are you kidding? Again airpower could have takin any missiles or labs out. If we wanted to, I'd would have been a piece of cake.

bottom line: Just as airpower doesnt win wars alone, it cant stop terrorist sponsorship and rogue nation's activities by itself.

Your bottom line is wrong.

Airpower could have taken out *anything* deemed militarily offensive on the ground routinely, on short notice. *Including* his capacity to produce oil for offensive purposes. Piece of cake. We've done it in other wars and it worked very well.

[Chgogal]

But how would we have taken out Saddam's WMD program in Libya when we didn't even know about it? It IS because we went into Iraq that led to that knowledge.

[No Longer Free State]

Sorry torie and MC, but if you all don't know by now that the AP gives voices that want to destroy this country the biggest megaphone in their commentary articles, then you will never learn.

Here's something we can agree on. Ironically, they'd claim this was an unbiased piece of news reporting covering a speech to a political group. Not that I'd agree with them in the least.

[F.J. Mitchell]

"Voices that perhaps need to be heard?"

Whether these voices need to be heard or not-they will be heard over and over-they are saying exactly what the liberal media, the democrats and Snob and Throb, the DemocRATS candidates want to hear.

Which country's chickin Military are you a veteran of anyway?