Posted on 05/07/2006 2:27:02 PM PDT by WaterDragon
The Republican Party is uneasy as it shambles toward the crucial 2006 congressional elections. Many of its supporters claim to feel demoralized, if not seduced and abandoned, by the conservative president they thought they elected in 2004. With President Bush's Nixonian economic policies and unwillingness to curtail federal spending, and the Republican faithful as confused as everyone else about the Iraq War, this is a good time to gain some political perspective from two veteran architects of the Reagan Revolution.
In the midst of another difficult political predicament, Germany's Iron Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, once said he had finally found two experts who clearly understood the problem. Unfortunately, they disagreed with one another on the solution. So do Bruce Bartlett and Kevin Phillips. But with the GOP political-direction-finder whirling like a compass needle in a magnetic storm, perhaps they can at least help illustrate its different aspects.
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
You mean Charlie Crist, no "h." He was already the lead GOP candidate for Governor, so Tom Gallagher should've run for the Senate. Miss Harris is technically a top-tier candidate, but getting toxic levels of support.
What, exactly are you trying to insinuate?
If you sat out the election or voted for one of the loser parties, I'll personally invite you to leave. And I hope Jim will also.
You're a DU troll, if not in reality, in sentiment.
Can you name the top 20 Constitution Party office holders in the United States?
Hahahaha...I love the Bush-bots. The moment anyone says anything negative about their great infallible leader, they're automatically labeled a "DU troll."
If Bush is the best the GOP can do, it's got no purpose existing anymore. I'm sorry, but it's true. Outside of court nominations and proposing Social Security reform, this administration hasn't done anything noteworthy. Well, nothing noteworthy in a positive sense. How you guys have the gall to call people who criticize Bush "DU trolls" is beyond me, especially considering how George Bush is responsible for the largest Medicare expansion since LBJ, refuses to veto absurd Congressional spending bills, and constantly makes the GOP look like a bunch of corrupt fools with the horrible way this White House communicates.
George Bush is not infallible, and does deserve criticism from the right. Unless, of course, you're a neocon, in which case I suppose Bush is the greatest President in the history of the US.
Let me very clear: you just as well BE a Democrat, since you're effectively voting for one.
Here's an untold aspect of the poor Bush approval rating. Many people who disapprove of Bush are conservatives who are disgusted by the Dubai fiasco, poor border security, and the inept resonse to Hurricane Katrina.
But the fact that they disapprove of Bush's job performance doesn't mean they'll be voting for liberal candidates in November.
How precious.
You do know the Neocon tag as an indictment for everything that is true and blue and beautiful, has lost traction, even on this site, don't you? You would make a suck lawyer. You don't know how to use a knife to go for the critical artery, and instead just damage subcutaneous tissue. By the way, Bush is not ever going to run again for anything. As one who has become somewhat disenchanted with Bush, the exercise of Bush bashing seems just so yesterday. The issue is, what do we do now? Bush is not going to change his hard wired views to accommodate anyone. What you see with Bush, is what you get.
Bush is not a complex man. He never took Machiavelli to heart. In fact, I doubt if he ever read him, which is a pity, because I quite like the M man, and in fact wrote a rather serious paper about him in college.
Let me very clear: you just as well BE a Democrat, since you're effectively voting for one.
Who in the blue hell are you? You don't know me, you don't know who I've voted for, and you don't know I support. In fact, you know jack s**t about my politics, so don't even act like you do.
Stop antagonizing well-meaning members on this board. I've flipped back in the posts and I see all sorts of nonsense from you to people in this thread. Everyone here cares, at least to a certain extent, about getting CONSERVATIVE policy enacted. That does not mean, however, that they have to kiss George Bush's behind, and fall in lockstep with the party line or Bush line on things. Pathetic drones like you are pathetic, no matter which side of the aisle they are on.
You're a disgusting partisan hack, and you should be ashamed of yourself. For the good of the party and for the good of the conservative movement, just zip your mouth shut and let the more reasonable people out there make a case for the GOP and conservatism- because you're certainly making no case for it yourself.
You're a gift to the Democratic Party. If I was a DUer, I'd be lifting your quotes straight off this board and using it as an example of how Bush supporters can't handle dissent. It's not true, of course, but you do nothing to prove the assertion false.
Let me be very clear: you just as well BE a self-labeled partisan hack, since you're effectively acting like one.
Really? Just what Republican leader said that? Can you provide a citation?
It's not Bush-bashing. The initial article posted in this thread discussed Bush's impact on the GOP, and I'm merely saying that I agree with it to a certain extent. Whether we like it or not, Bush WILL be a factor in 2006 and 2008. He really shouldn't be, because not all Republicans are like Bush and Bush isn't like all Republicans, but politics is politics. Just as we tried to link Gore to Clinton's corruption back in 2000, you know Hillary or whoever else will do the same in 2008 with respect to Bush. As a result, Bush owes it to this party to have the White House communicate better, to promote policy that Republicans can be proud of, and to do anything he can to make sure the GOP ISN'T demonized as the party of corruption or incompetence. He may not be running again, but the party certainly will be. It's the least he could do.
What are you going to do about incumbent Republicans?
The more things change . . .
I'm sorry if I offended you, but I was a conservative before RWR (an outsider from the GOP leadership) brought me into the big tent pretty much full time. I have been in the GOP (registered to vote as such, FYI) since 1982 when I turned 18. As for any votes for dems, I voted for my neighbor once who was running for the State House and I crossed over and voted for Dean during the Dem primary in '04 because I thought he really spoke for his party. LOL!
I didn't vote for GHWB in '92 due to Ruby Ridge and the fallout from his p-ing with the NRA over the "Jackbooted Thugs" issue. Voted Libertarian. (There were also issues about the Clean Air Act Amendments, not offing Saddam when we had the first chance and could have taken Syria out right then too....)
I didn't vote for Bob "Tax Collector for the Welfare State" Dole in '96 either. I walked in the booth, read the ballot and thought "Left wing socialist (Clinton), right wing socialist (Dole) and fascist (Perot)", and hit the Libertarian button again.
I voted, supported and worked for the election of GHWB both times, and over the last year or so I feel qualified to start a "Raped Conservative Crisis Center".
I believe you have already asked me to leave, and if Jim decrees such I'll have no choice. Just toss me into the bin where you keep the Birchers. Meanwhile, read my tagline again.
As I said, Bush is who he is. He isn't going to change. He isn't going to become articulate, and crafty, or proactive about details when details matter, and change his views about how to deal with illegals, or do a Kissinger on Iraq, or go native about Big Oil, or anything else. He will continue to do what he believes in. Bush is going to be Bush, until the end. In fact, I doubt that he is really that engaged about containing Pubbie damage in 2006.
It is the Democrats who are on a one-way road to Whig-dom.
Coming from a person who is more than willing to allow the Democrats to take over in the fall?
You have NO interest in enacting conservative policy, to any degree, if you enable Democrats.
And you will enable Democrats if you don't vote for your Republican rep or Senator in the fall.
I've been here a lot longer than you, buddy-boy, and I'll be here after you're gone. I'm not the only one on this thread who smells a rat.
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.