This being an imaginary line, it can go on forever, but regardless, there is a middle point.
From this middle, the further you go to the left, the more extreme the occupants appear (same as going to the far right).
Question - Where do you put yourself on this line?
Answer - most everyone believes they are near the middle, for the Democrats they may think they are a little to the left, but but still near the center, same for Republicans.
So, if we each feel we are in (or near) the center, and that is how we view the world. Unless someone thinks excactly like we do, they are on one extreme or the other.
Is this administration conservative, well it depends on where you are standing on the line. To our friends on the far right, no. To our friends on the far left yes.
When someone on this forum complains that President Bush is not a conservative, it tells me more about them, then it does about President Bush.
The President of the United States is not a dictator. I think I need to repeat this, because there are some who from their complaint give the impression a President can do get anything they want by just saying that is what he wants done. The Presidents is not a dictator. He has to convince people to do what he wants. He has the power of the bully pulpit, and this can be effective, but not always.
Everyone in Washington, from the members of Congress, to their staff, to the lobbiest to the unkown workers in the various departments in our goverments all have an agenda.
Anyone that has ever dealt with office polictics can understand how someone who does not want something done can muck up the works.
So President is not conservative, what the writer should say is the President is not as conserative as me.
There is a shift in the polictical landscape. The exteme left wing element of the Democrat party has gained control of the party. This does not sit well with those Democrats who hold view we would call moderate, or in the middle. They are finding they have more in common with Republicans then Democrats, and they are changing parties.
They have changed their party but not their views. These new Republicans are moving the center towards the left.
So, if I concede that President Bush is not as conservative as I am, and he is not doing everything I would like him to do, what do I do?
Vote for a Democrat? Not likely.
Don't vote, this will have the same effect as voting for a Democrat.
There is not much I can do but vote for the candidate that best represents my views knowing they will not match 100%.
If and when the Democrat party finally goes the way of the Whigs, and a new conservative party is formed, I will gladly join, but not until the stake has been driven through the heart of the Democrat party.
Borders are like a sieve. Govt. spending is way up. Bush calls the minutemen "vigilantes". We have a democrat in the WH! Yet the Bushbots just nod yes and repeat over and over Bush good....bush good....FOOLS!!!!!!
"Indeed, what happened to the W of 2000"
Oh, another of those 9/10 guys.
As Abraham Lincoln said, "One war at a time". Why Iraq first? Well, if you accept the premise that the area of operations in the war against terrorism is the Middle East, then it becomes obvious. Just look at a map - Iraq is easily the most strategic place from with to direct military operations against the middle east and the most strategic place to establish democracy in the hopes that it will expand outward.
Sheesh, this guy is as nutty as Pat Robertson. I think they should both shut up.
ping
Only small minds insist on "the cause" for the war or "the reason" for going to war.
There are many reasons, all totalling together that made the Iraq operation necessary and wise.
The guy is right on about the domestic agenda. To increase the size and scope of the Federal government during wartime is unprecedented. Bad ideas keep getting passed with the Medicare prescription bill being at the top of the list. Good ideas like Social Security private accounts fall by the wayside. Even the energy bill was so pork-laden that I'm not sure it was worth passing in its current form. Add in fumbling away the ball on illegal immigration. Yes, the domestic agenda has been a disaster.
But, I do take issue with his over-simplistic take on the WOT. Iraq and Afghanistan were the right thing to do both politically and strategically. Pakistan is going to be a problem, but we were in a position where we needed a friend in the region. Iran may or may not take care of itself, and it's worth the risk to wait and see. North Korea is a potential tinderbox. We have the responsibility to protect South Korea and the Chinese just waiting for an excuse to go in. Combine that with Russian, French and German sabotage and I think that the Bush team has done a creditable job.
"Have we really set the stage for a durable conservative majority?"
Y'all are arguing over the petty stuff. This is the most important point in the whole post. The answer, of course, is "NO" - does anyone want to posit to the contrary?
Who is this Bainbridge twit anyway? Sounds like he may need a loyalty lesson. Things are going great for the real Americans in the party. We've got a bunch of terrorists cornered over there and Hell a'int near full, so let's stay as long as it takes!
another koolaid thread.
Hagel's intern.