Posted on 10/26/2004 1:45:29 PM PDT by ARCADIA
Yea I agree Bush didn't realize just how much help the DUmbocrat party was going to be to the terrorist insurgents.
They have fed them hope that we'll elect sKerry and cut and run most of this year.
I'm sure it's cost us many lives. It's one thing for these pigs to be encouraged by Al Jazeera but when it comes from the halls of congress and the U.S. media, that's something else.
Who gives a rat's ass?
Sullivan, obviously, and quite freely. You could probably goose his beagle, too, if you offered to play organ at Sully and sweetie's wedding.
And when it comes to a choice between supporting the defense of civilization, or electing someone who supports Mr Sullivan dipping his wick wherever he wants to, whom does Sullivan opt for? Sullivan you toad, the taliban would drop a wall on you. President Bush did away with them. John Kerry would still be jawboning about it!
Sullivan is thinking with his anus.
I always said it, Gays and lesbians are a one issue voting block. They want the mainstream to adopt them and accept their lifestyle choices (gay marriage in particular) defacto making them a one issue voting constituency. O'Sullivan is no different. He may have been flirting with the right but in the end he needs to "get in line" No room for dissension in that constituency. Too bad. Being part of the mainstream is about breaking ranks with your constituency.
YAWN
You should join him at the voting booth and vote for Kerry if you're that effin stupid to allow those two DNC talking points upset you
I have been trying to articulate my response to you, ARCADIA, but I am at a loss. If we, as a Republic, are as spineless and unwilling to risk any setback whatsoever as you seem to imply, then we are well and truly screwed. Go ahead, vote for Kerry. We will all just get what we deserve. Anyone that can stomach the thought of pulling a lever for that nematode is beyond trying to save. I give up.
Sullivan's endorsement comes down to one thing: gay marriage. He's willing to put the entire country at the feet of the United Nations (and, therefore, at risk), just so he can have some "right" that he thinks he's being denied. He's lost all credibility and can only do one thing after this, follow David Brock's lead.
So, should an election be backward looking, i.e., punish or reward the incumbent based on performance, or should an election be forward looking, i.e., voting for the candidate most likely to do a good job for America in the future? Nothing sKerry has said really relates to the future except his many phantom "plans." His campaign has been negative through and through, merely critcizing the president's performance. He has no plan and no message. For me the choice is obvious.
Hey, I'm a Butt Pirate, too, here in NYC. But, I suppor this President's reelection 150%. Andrew Sullivan has become a frustrated gay man, who has decided that the only issue of any importance (while Islamic Terrorists want to kill us) is whether or not he can marry his partner in Oklahoma (or some other state, other than MA). His thought process is so unreasonable that it is a joke. He basis his entire premise of supporting Kerry on the fact that just "maybe" Kerry is telling the truth when he says he will be tough. Kerry's record belies this fact. He has never been strong - not against the terrorists, not against the Communists. This Butt Pirate, and many of this butt pirate's fellow butt pirates, are supporting the President because our security is primary.
I guess Andrew expects that JF Kerry will heal all the gay journalists infected with AID's if he become's President.
'Absence of WMDs' is disingenuous - just because the US and UN haven't found stockpiles doesn't mean they weren't there. Not necessary nuclear WMDs, but they did have chemical WMDs. They are probably in Syria or Pakistan. It's not a failure - it was a successful pre-emption of SH's nuclear and biological WMD programs.
How does one 'anticipate the strength' of a post-war insurgency before the war? I think your standards are a little unrealistic with regard to post-war insurgency. Name ONE situation in the world where guerilla fighters were easily subdued.
The media created these issues for their personal benefit, and for John Kerry's. These are not issues mature, experienced adults should take seriously. Unfortunately, holding back the lies and slants of a hostile media is like putting the finger in the dam...
Hey, I'm a Butt Pirate, too, here in NYC. But, I suppor this President's reelection 150%. Andrew Sullivan has become a frustrated gay man, who has decided that the only issue of any importance (while Islamic Terrorists want to kill us) is whether or not he can marry his partner in Oklahoma (or some other state, other than MA). His thought process is so unreasonable that it is a joke. He basis his entire premise of supporting Kerry on the fact that just "maybe" Kerry is telling the truth when he says he will be tough. Kerry's record belies this fact. He has never been strong - not against the terrorists, not against the Communists. This Butt Pirate, and many of this butt pirate's fellow butt pirates, are supporting the President because our security is primary.
"Bush just didn't trust Saddam enough!"
A slogan that has caught on...
His homosexual agenda trumps everything. Some people put their personal needs over the country. That person would be a Democrat.
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.