Posted on 10/20/2005 7:18:02 PM PDT by frankjr
Able what? (sarcastic voice)
"time for Scooter to scoot"
I agree with most everyline on this subject. BUT, I have attorney's in my family. They take cases for the money. Every lawyer I know does. Our Vice President should not have hired him. So don't blame an attorney that wants to keep working.
"So don't blame an attorney that wants to keep working."
I have no problem with an attorney working for a client. But once Scooter became part of the administration, we became his client, not Rich, and he shouldn't have placed that call.
If you read and recognized the last 9 words of my post you would know that I fully understand the Nixonian implications of my suggestion, made in jest!
Reagan was entitled to one mistake, huge, but forgivable :-)
From my recollection, these letters would have been mailed conveniently AFTER their testimony.
Eventually I figured that out...if you recognized that I recognized the Nixonian implications of your suggestion, you'll recognize that I'm of the vintage that the synapses are slowin' down a little... %~*
Yeah, Sandy O'Connor. :-) Anywhoo, I agree with him on this. The basis of conservatism really is to decrease the size and scope of the government which is, in essence, what libertarianism is. Unfortunately, the term "libertarian" was hijacked by the kooks in the Libertarian Party.
In a 1975 interview with Reason Magazine...
If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.
Re Prez Hillary:
That was the most demoralizing, deflating, depressing post I have ever seen on FR. I wanted to throw my laptop across the room. BUt it is hard to argue with.
What is going on here?
You should have posted a warning: "Red Pill Alert." Now what do I do?
No, I don't really hate GWB. He seems to be a nice, down to earth kind of guy. The type of person who'd make a good neighbor.
However, too much of the time, I hear something out of the White House that just makes you stop and go "what the....".
Just as a thought experiment, Gore steals Florida in 2000. However, he drops dead right after taking the oath of office.
You can only come up with a handful of things that our fictional President Lieberman would have done much differently from what GWB has supported for real.
He probably doesn't prosecute the war quite as hard as GWB, but I don't see him sitting on his hands like Gore would have. Under any realistic scenario Al-Quaeda is not going to be marching down the streets of Wichita behind a brass band, although there are some tinfoil hat types around here who try to scare themselves with their own ghost stories.
We don't get a tax cut,(thanks, I'll take my own money back any way I can, but the 110 bucks I got wasn't exactly life-changing.)
Lieberman wouldn't have brought up SS reform, but so far that's just a bunch of hot air, nobody is actually doing anything on that front.
Instead of two liberal USSC justices for sure,(if the GOP Senate remained spineless, a mortal lock if there ever was one), we're going to get two who I hope will be screaming, full-tilt Jeffersonians, but then again, may end up as liberal wingnuts, we just don't know enough about them to be sure.
Other than that, most of GWB's efforts seem to be right out of the Democrat playbook. The guy is just baffling.
Well, by those terms Reagan was no Conservative, cause he doubled the Federal budget, but I know what you mean about Libertarianism, and the kooks in the Libertarian Party that hijacked it, Have a great weekend!
There is no evidence that a true conservatives can be elected if he plays hardball with the rats. Reagan reminded people that he didn't leave the rats the rats left him while he invoked the names of FDR and JFK. He was elected president of his union twice. He was running against Carter and double digit inflation, unemployment and interest rates.
Once in office Reagan gave the rats the the Social Security Amendments of 1983, the Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984, and lots of other money to spend while he rebuilt the military. Reagan used to share drinks with Tip O'Neil after 5 pm.
I mean, Kerry was an outright traitor to his country, had a sordid history, was just plain weird-looking, and was talented as a rock. Maybe in Massachusetts they can sell that, but in the whole US? Not anymore.
And he got more votes for US President than any other candidate in history, with the exception of Dubya.
re the 110 bucks, whats wrong with that, if you were more economically productive you would have gotten more back.
comparing W with Lieberman is ridiculous.
You say, "This is an unmitigated disaster and could ultimately lead to the impeachment of President Bush."
You gotta be kidding me, right? Or are you making a joke?
Didn't say there was anything wrong with my tax cut. Happy to have gotten it.
I certainly don't begrudge the really wealthy the pile that they got back. It's no crime to be rich, and it was their own money, that they had earned, that they were getting back in any event. Trying to get there myself.
Its just that at the level that I am now, where the bulk of the population is, the tax cut wasn't a really big deal. A couple of nice evenings at the local steakhouse. Thanks GWB, the t-bone and beer were great.
I laid out any number of reasons why I believe that GWB hasn't governed too much differently than Joe Lieberman would have. Just calling it "ridiculous", doesn't refute any of the points. Go ahead, show me point by point where you think I'm wrong, I'm a big boy, I can take the criticism.
.
A Radio Talk Show host subing for Hugh Hewitt just speculated that this prosecutor is out to indict the highest levels of the WIG Group, the White House Iraq Group, over its handling of the Iraq War.
In other words, this is a usurping of the powers of President BUSH to wage war abroad in order to protect us here at home ...after our being attacked once already here at home.
The Enemy is now Within...
and always has been.
Just ask President NIXON.
That's what Howlin said, but you're approaching the same answer from a different direction.
The left has been trying to impeach President Bush and his administration for nearly 4 years for one thing or another. Losers don't like to lose, and what you are seeing is the losers trying to score some sort of win, some-way, somehow.
The left is issuing a two-pronged attack. The bogus series of charges of "the illegality of the Iraq War" and "the culture of corruption", aimed at President Bush, his administration, and the GOP as a whole.
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.