Posted on 07/23/2005 3:47:24 AM PDT by Happy2BMe
Neville Chamberlain speeches, I agree, are far more soothing.
Take your strawman arguement and stick it elsewhere.
There's a wide area of more common sense that covers the ground between demogogues such Tancredo and appeasers such as Chamberlain.
Let the record show, that with your post, you don't see that.
The Russian state was producing those nuclear weapons. The Russian state was targeted with our nuclear weapons.
Terrorist organizations are potentially targeting us with nuclear weapons. 900 million people are not targeting us with nuclear weapons. Those terrorist organizations are being targeted.
I believe some of the centrist Republicans are giving a workshop on the topic "Winning Through Appeasement," and "How to Fund a Campaign with Petro-Dollars." You ought to sign up.
I don't belong to the school of thought of appeasement. You, are a text box example of a dumbed-down conservative.
Tancredo won't attract votes? Even the Democrats I know agree with Tancredo on immigration and his willingness to talk tough on terrorism, most Democrats aren't like the lefties we encounter on the internet, no need to even attempt attracting those people to vote Republican.
He is just the kind of nominee that will bring out the voters. The media/leftists can't effectively shred Tancredo the same way they couldn't shred Reagan, because his message is clear, in the same way they can't rip Bush about tax cuts even though they despise them because there is nothing ambiguous about Bush's position on tax cuts, they shred him where they think they can make him apologize for something. The media/leftists would much prefer someone like Frist who can easily be pushed around.
Let the record show by the actions of this current president that anybody who uses Islam to kill innocent people and to wage jihads will be removed from the scene like no other actions of any politician.
Even if you don't accept Tancredo's rhetoric, the root causes of the 1000 year old struggle will need to be addressed at some point, or our constituency will begin to feel they have been sucker punched.
The root causes are being addressed in the WOT. The violent Mullah rhetoric is being defunded and they are being removed by governments in Muslim countries that we painstakingly support. It's a slow process. It's the best course of action. The WOT will not have been completed until such has been accomplished in its entirety. The WOT will be a failure if such is not accomplished.
No. You'll let it go because you were the one who first resorted to name calling. Now that I've called you on it, you are backing away and blaming me.
Calm down for a moment and consider why Tancredo's rhetoric has appeal. The fact is that these terrorists, as George Bush knows, are not acting independently. They are being funded by Muslim states around the world.
They have the STATED sympathy of 10% of British muslims. (Can you imagine how much un-stated sympathy they have?) At some point, the ploy of talking only about terrorists will have to break down if the Saudis and their allies don't stop these attacks. If the attempt to divide terrorists from their patron states doesn't work, the patron states will have to come into the crosshairs. Bush knows that, and I think you know that.
I agree. Iran and Syria are the biggest remaining problems. In that we can agree.
Tancredo won't attract votes?
No. Tancredo won't attract enough votes to win. Tancredo will attract votes.
The MSM and Hillary prefer Tancredo who will never win the Republican primaries by saying what he said about DeLay. The MSM and Hillary per fer Tancredo because he will never win as a third party candidate and will cause the Republicans to lose.
BTW, I don't agree that Frist can be pushed around.
it's worse actually... we still fought the Cold War and won. fear of being deemed racist has tied our leaders hands on immigration and the WOT...and other more minor issues
You make a strong case...oh wait, you don't make any case.
I pointed out to you that the masses want a President who will unambiguously deal with terrorists and illegal immigrants and your response is that we need a candidate who is weaker than Tancredo on these issues to attract enough voters to win.
No, I said nothing even remotely close to that. Ping me when you address something that I've said.
Me:I don't belong to the school of thought of appeasement. You, are a text box example of a dumbed-down conservative.
You called me a centrist Republican and an appeaser. I called you a dumbed-down conservative. You started the name calling. I responded in kind. Your name calling was not to any correct point. Mine was.
I do, however, want to stop rolling around on the playground and get back to the issue...
If you wish to stop rolling around in the playground and if you wish to get back to the issue, then do it already. Don't expect me to appease your lack of sticking to the issue.
Who is this candidate that you propose who is as unambiguous on illegal immigration and terrorists as Tancredo but has the ability to attract more voters?....I didn't think so.
Correct-o-rooni.
The historic reality of Islam is violent hegemony. Until we face the fact that no Muslim majority has succeeded in protecting what we would call inviolate rights, we won't be able to clearly fight this war. Muslims will have to prove they have grown up, and we can't treat them like grown ups until they start paying the rent, mowing the lawn, and acting, well, like Civilized westerners.
That's what the war in Iarq was about. Similar success in Afghanistan and Lebanon are ocurring. There's still a long way to go.
I believe in the current strategy in the WOT. I don't believe that Tancredo would be better than what we currently have.
As far as immigration goes, I don't even like legal immigration except to maintain our current population in numbers. Tancredo, IMPV, doesn't have the political acumen to get elected and to enforce current immigration laws. I don't think he can get 51% of the vote.
Immigration is not a primary issue to most voters. A case in point was the Cannon, Throckmorton Republican primary last year. Throckmorton was staunchly anti-immigration. Cannon was at least portrayed as pro. In one of the most conservative districts in the country, the anti guy lost big.
....I didn't think so.
I don't know what you are mumbling.
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.