Posted on 02/09/2006 12:18:44 PM PST by Reagan Man
Rep. Tom Tancredo (R.-Colo.) didn’t hold back in his criticism of President Bush this morning at the Conservative Political Action Conference—delivering what amounted to a presidential stump speech that could have easily been delivered in New Hampshire or Iowa.
Tancredo attacked the administration for its support of a guest-worker program for illegal aliens and its big-spending ways on education and Medicare prescription drugs.
“It is the President who is out of step with his party, not Tom Tancredo,” the Colorado Republican said to applause at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Northwest Washington, D.C.
Tancredo called for the repeal of two programs offered by President Bush: the No Child Left Behind Act and the Medicare prescription drug program. Both expanded the cost of government and drew the scorn of conservatives in Congress.
Tancredo said the Big Government policies of the Bush administration need to be halted. He said conservatives must return the GOP to a “party of individual rights and shouldn’t afraid to say it.”
Widen your scope then. Look at the 'picture' a little closer. I'm not one to view the world through 'rose-colored' glasses; I've more prone to looking through a magnifying glass, that I wll admit. However, I'm not going to be pleased when, 5 years or so from now, the hearings being conducted are about 'not connecting the dots' once again.
By the way, I speak for myself, sir. I am not part of any 'tag team'.
I'm not touching that one! NO COMMENT...lol.
Since you've acknowledged that we've had an effect so far, I see no reason to think that continuing the pressure won't have an additional effect. There are times for compromise, but not when one side has a position that is bereft both of logic and popular support. There's no need to compromise with that. In such a situation, when pressure has been shown to work, the only proper course is to keep it up.
"Widen your scope then." You ask of me precisely what I ask of you.
"Look at the 'picture' a little closer." This is the opposite of widening your scope.
"I'm not one to view the world through 'rose-colored' glasses; I've more prone to looking through a magnifying glass, that I wll admit" My reponse is the same, look at the big picture, don't magnify on a single couple of pixels.
What I meant ('scuse me, I'm getting tired) is widen your scope enough to see those 'dots' and then zoom in.
I promise not to say "I told you so." (But I may give you an elbow in the ribs.)
I can only stretch an analogy so far, but you're still asking me to "to see those 'dots' and then zoom in." I'm asking you to see the dots and zoom out.
Why did you assume I meant you when I said 'losers?'
Maybe there was a reason.
But lift away, if it makes you happy.
I assumed no such thing. That is the conclusion you reached.
>>>>Maybe there was a reason.
Spit it out.
The vast majority of voters are dummies who vote by the latest commercial. It is the wackydoodles who destroy republican unity. Are you purposely among them, or are you simple being useful?
So what does that say about Bush's legitimacy?
Loser? At the very least. I think you're demoncrap candidates lose and you're really frustrated. I think you're as phony a conservative as a three dollar bill is queer.
Sounds just like a lying, whining demoncrap ...
LOL!
Like stopping to view an accident, I just had to check this thread again. I see nothing has changed.
Just trying to do my small part ... ;^)
You've been superb!
I am stealing "Embarrassment" ...lol.
Wouldn't you know it, because it's the immediate logical consequence of your assertion that most voters are idiots. Have fun spinning yourself out of that.
Besides being impatient and desiring instant gratification I assume you to be incapable of enlightenment, however ...
Lets just pretend for a minute, please humor me, lets pretend that Mexico isn't corrupt, first. What a stretch that is? How could that be accomplished? By economic opportunity, perhaps? Could a truly capitalistic, and successful Mexico offer its citizens opportunities that now exist in our country? The big picture goes far beyond a fence and far beyond where your vision can take you.
I disagree with your assessment of Tancredo's chances, at least as regards your one-third, one-third, ratios of voter appeal. How far he could go would depend a great deal, but not exclusively, on how he would or could present himself. I don't think anything like "one-third" of the voting public "wants to hire cheap labor" and a President Tancredo would squelch that---these formulas , I think, are getting a little old and stale, and no issue is ever exactly "either/or". So Tancredo can get pretty far on his own, I think, and would have widespread POPULAR apppeal, but just watch how far the popular appeal would be allowed to go by the GOP Establishment. You thought the Dems were disgusting and pathetic in their attempts to smear Alito? You haven't seen the GOP Machine swing into action to smear Tancredo, who is still nominally, "one of their own".
It should not be NECESSARY to "keep the pressure" on Bush to do something about the borders. He has REFUSED to see it as a major problem. The reasons for this are not hard to find. Do NOT expect anything to be done by President Bush about the borders! He should have "led" the way he did on the WOT, because, for all any of us know, the Border issue is and should be linked to the WOT. But he figured he'd trade off one for the other. Unlike the contradictions of LBJ trying to wage the Vietnam War,a brutal enterprise, while fighting the War on Poverty at home (an orgy of programs with money thrown at them), Bush would have basically had to fight TWO wars on TWO fronts, BOTH of them GRUELING, RELENTLESS and offering no immediate upside.
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.