I'm more upset with Conservatives than I am with George W. Bush

[mwfsu84]

If I had told you on 9/11/2001 that we'd go four and half years and counting without another terrorist attack on US soil, would you have believed me?

If I had told you that US-led forces would secure Afghanistan in just a few months...something the Soviets couldn't accomplish in ten years...would you have thought I was crazy?

If I had told you that Saddam was gone, that Khadaffy had renounced terrorism, and that Iraq was on the verge of becoming the second democracy in the Middle East, would have thought I was on medication?

Sometimes in our disappointment of this administration, we often forget some of the positives. The economy is strong. More Americans are homeowners. With tax cuts, we're spending less time working for Uncle Sam.

And if you take those benefits for granted, just imagine how much different things would be under a President Al Gore.

So if the president's stance on immigration and spending upset you - and they do upset me - what are you going to do about it? Stay at home? Nothing could be worse for conservativism. Your non-support will usher in more immigrants, higher taxes, and weaker national security.

If the GOP loses Congress, George W. Bush will be removed from office. Nothing would embolden terrorists more. How can we be counted on to wage an effective war when we can't even decide who our enemy is?

George W. Bush isn't the enemy. But that's exactly the message conservatives will send to the world if they stay at home this November.

If you're upset with W. on immigration - write him, write a Republican Congressman, let him know how you feel. It was conservatives who got Bush to change his mind on Harriet Meirs.

I promise you, a Democratic Congress won't be nearly as responsive to your needs.

[Vicomte13]

That's why the border fence is the key, this year, to saving the Republican Party's fortunes.

[Redleg Duke]

Well spoken, although the "conservative purists" will trash you from now on.

[TBP]

Good luck finding conservative Democrats.

They never were abundant, and with teh movement of the Dixiecrats into the Republican Party, tehy're few and far between. However, when you do find one, he may well be worth supporting. Zell Miller, for example, is more conservative than his "Republican" successor.

But when both parties offer liberals, Tweedledum and Tweedledee, if conservatives unite in support of a third, conservative candidate, we can win. And we should do that and not worry about whether it "hurts Republcians." The idea is to get our principles advanced, whether it's by Republicans (occasionally), Democrats (very rarely), or members of some other party or no party at all.

Conservatives first, supporters of our parties second.

[Fruitbat]

As well, no one thought that Pataki up in NYS had a prayer against Cuomo either. The reason why he won is because he made a very tangible issue, the "65-mph speed limit," an issue. Every single voter could relate and I distinctly remember friends and relatives telling me that the biggest reason why they were voting for him was for that.

Why? Afterall, Pataki promised lower taxes too, which in NYS is like promising many voters that they can haul their own trash to the dump each week given how liberal many of them are. They'll try to tell ya that it was lower taxes, but the reason was the speed limit issue that Cuomo refused to move to 65 from 55.

Either way, it helped Pataki win the election easily.

So too can a viable 3PC win this next election. I truly believe that there are more than enough voters that are PO'd enough to tell most of Congress to go screw themselves and to take a chance on a decent 3PC.

Perot, a complete fool, ran and took an enormous portion of the vote in an election with a minute fraction of the serious high-profile issues that will exist in '08. This fall is another matter. I don't think voters are happy with the GOP, but I think they're even less happy with the Dims/libs. It should be interesting.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Where is the “vanity” indicator???

[baltoga]

There is a lot of frustration with Bush, but I think a lot has to do with how the administration put forth their second term agenda and allowed the media to define them:
1. Bush spent his political capital on reforming Social Security. A noble cause, but what a waste.
2. The response to hurricane Katrina was a disaster and the administration from a public relation standpoint looked incompetent. When the media attempted to replicate the same incompetence on Jeb Bush in Florida he got in front of the story and stated Floridians had plenty of warning to prepare and if they didn't - it's their own fault. Guess what? the media's slant just died.
3. The administration allowed the antiwar movement to set the tone of discussion on the war in Iraq.
4. Corruption, corruption, corruption. I'm stunned by the level of corruption and again the administration looked incompetent. If power corrupts the media slant is Republicans have too much power.

[Peach]

I'm bookmarking your superb post! Thank you, mystery. Thank you very, very much.

[Fruitbat]

Well, I know what to do. This nation is headed down the can. There's nothing to stop us from being annexed by Mexico (worst case) or being overrun by Mexicans who will later impose thier political views and beliefs on the entirety of the U.S. (best case things unchanged)

I'd rather take a gamble now than simply try to buy another decade before the inevitable happens and I believe many Americans feel the same way. The polls show all but perfect unity on the border issue. In fact, if this issue doesn't scare the bejeebers out of Americans, then nothing short of a holocaust or nuclear strike on us ever will.

I can't disagree more that a 3PC will never win. Perot, again, a complete fool, horrible presence, and clown politician, with a running mate making Muhammed Ali (today) look like Einstein, got what, almost 20% of the vote? Alice Cooper could have gotten that.

IMO if a decent conservative candidate gets a very good campaign manager, and begins running a very good campaign beginning mid next year, they'll have a very good shot at 35-40% of the vote which depending upon how the votes fell otherwise, might be enough to win, pending the electoral situation. A State such as California might even turn his way depending upon what happens between now and then.

Look for a push by some Congressmen, some GOP included no doubt, to provide voting rights to illegals for the next election. Mark my words. It'll never fly, by then, but look for a serious push.

Bottom line, We have a serious problem that threatens to undermine our entire lifestyle and "American Way" not to mention poses threats of civil war(s) within the U.S. at some future point.

Pushing it off another 10, perhaps 20 years, isn't a solution, it's a cheap, easy, and cowardly way out. I give a rats rear end about tax cuts if this nation is run by Mexicans in 20 or it becomes unsafe to even go to the corner store or a nation in which everytime your kids go outside you run the risk of never seeing them again.

I've had enough. The GOP has had plenty of time to sh&# or get off the pot and they've done neither!

Frankly, I think it's time for the people to insist on a new form of government or a complete overhaul of this one such as the Constitution provides. That of course won't happen for reasons, among which is complacency along with an aversion to "rocking the boat."

But don't kid yourself, a non-clown 3PC has a real shot at winning the next presidential election if they run on several things and have a decent background and one other of running a single company. Border control/security/and illegal alien enforcement, tax cuts, and a promise to continue to nominate conservative USSC justices will do the trick! I promise!

There aren't too many people that could pull it off, but there are a couple out there. An alternative would be finding a Republican that hasn't been neutered and can be trusted not to rush to get their nads snipped on the day after Inauguration Day. Will that happen? I highly doubt it.

[mystery-ak]

I forgot to give Wolfstar credit last night...I went to bed early with my cold.....

[ohioWfan]

1)....You've been flying into a tizzy for close to a year, 2)..... whenever anyone has had the temerity to question the wisdom of decisions made by President George W. Bush. You are a die-hard fan, as your screen name demonstrates. I became acquainted with you because I questioned his choice of Harriet Miers. You called me a liar, questioned my honor and integrity, 3)......and generally shrieked hosannas for Harriet until she withdrew. So, I'd say 4)......your loyalties are not to conservative principles or even conservatives, and not even to the Republican Party. You're loyal to one man, and he's president. It's admirable in a way. But, if you're going to 5)......develop a persecution complex and label the large number of people who aren't absolutely, 100% on board with everything our president says or does as "enemies," you're going to end up undermining support far more effectively than any DUmmie could ever dream.

Dearest, RegulatorChild...........

THIS is your first post to me on this thread. I have placed in bold the outright lies in it. The rest isn't true, but those are your opinions, and you have the right to have them. The things in bold are completely false and slanderous, and you do not have the right to post them on a public forum. They are lies.

This post to me was unprovoked. I had not posted to you, and yet you came at me with 5 blatant lies in one short paragraph, all of which I can defend..........as can anyone else who knows anything around here.

So........you posted these lies, and then proceded to make a fool of yourself and attack and mock me for defending the TRUTH against your false accusations.

It was only when I left this board that I realized how utterly despicable your behavior was, and how foolish I was to engage you after such devious and malicious tactics. In the heat of the battle, I didn't see what you were doing, but in the light of day, it's very clear, and the only thing I will apologize for is for falling into your trap, and wasting bandwidth, and everyone's time by arguing with you.

I will let the record stand for itself...........and I will leave you to your own conscience for what you did, and pray for your eyes to be opened.

You don't just need to apologize to me........you need to ask forgiveness of the Lord.

[Peach]

I hope you feel better, mystery. I've saved this in my bookmarks and on Word.

[Vicomte13]

"Perot, a complete fool, ran and took an enormous portion of the vote in an election with a minute fraction of the serious high-profile issues that will exist in '08."

Perot was a "Complete fool"?

Uh, no, he was not.

Perot came from nothing and nowhere, but he got himself into Annapolis - no mean feat in itself - and then built EDS into a multi-billion dollar company. He was the CEO of General Motors and, from nothing, made himself $4 billion dollars. He still runs successful major businesses. Perot is a smarter businessman than Cheney, Bush, or any of the business elite that surround them. He's no fool.

Additionally, Perot is extremely loyal. Americans were taken hostage by the Iranians, and the American President dithered, then presided over a botched rescue attempt. Perot went and hired his own operatives, sent them into Iran and got his people out. That's bold, and loyal.

Perot is not a fool at all.

He sounded cranky when he was running, but remember that both political machines were after him. He was dangerous to them. Why was he a fool? For pointing out that the government was broken, in debt, and corrupt, and the borders were out of control? That's actually true.

Because he said that Republican operatives threatened to disrupt his daughter's wedding? Well, Republican operatives push polled about McCain's "illegitimate black child" (actually, she was ADOPTED by the McCain's) down in South Carolina, so Perot's allegations that there were threats of nasty revelations are not unbelievable.

Maybe Perot shouldn't have been President of the United States, but FOOL? No, Ross Perot is one of the most brilliant businessmen in the world - that is how a man born poor ends up with $4 billion dollars. Fools don't get into Annapolis and serve honorably as Naval Officers. (Jimmy Carter's also a USNA grad; he was a weak President and has been a worse ex-President, but he's certainly not a fool.) And Perot was more loyal to his employees, and more effective at getting them out, than the United States government and military under Jimmy Carter were towards US personnel.

Ross Perot is an honorable man, a smart man, and one of the greatest businessmen of the 20th Century. You disagree with his politics, and one is permitted to dislike him temperament, but fool? No. Perot is no fool.

"Eagles don't flock. You have to find them one at a time." - Ross Perot.

[mystery-ak]

I've saved this in my bookmarks and on Word.


Good....I plan on posting it on this type of thread....

[Fruitbat]

Perot was a political fool! Maybe that'll help.

[Spiff]

Third party will never win, I am not bashing you I am simply stating truth. I am in much of a quandary about this as well, voting for the the same coin with the same heads will only achieve the same results we have had. I have heard it said that Dems and Republicans are good cop bad cop simply to distract us like children at a puppet show watching the ragged figures bash each other with plastic clubs. The more I watch the more I think they are right. I do not know what to do really...

Yup. I've never heard of the Whig Party either. < /sarcasm >

[Fruitbat]

I notice that you didn't address the other issues:

Presence, running mate

Let's not cloud the issue!

Perot may have run with a different voice, larger stature, and a running mate that came across as mentally competent. Given all that, to have gotten the share of the vote that he did, was near miraculous and should be far more than enough hope that a 3PC with:

A decent presence

A voice that doesn't sound as if he just inhale 3 gallons of helium

A running mate that can actually debate and hold his own on issues

Such a candidate should very easily be able to secure a good 30% of the national vote!

[Vicomte13]

"Presence, running mate"

Admiral Stockdale was a great military hero.

Who was up there on the podium with him? Dan Quayle? Al Gore? A couple of blow-dried airheads.

The derision that the country gave to Admiral Stockdale is indicative of the obsession with stage performances that people have.

I watched those debates. Admiral Stockdale did not look mentally incompetent to me at all. He looked like an irritated straight shooter standing between a couple of smarmy young blow-dried fags. When Admiral Stockdale said "I don't know what I am doing up here", I was with him. What ARE you doing up there? These two guys are spinning lies and flim-flam, and you've got nothing much to say, because common sense doesn't take a bunch of BS.

Fact is, Ross Perot was the best chance for a real third party movement to get started since Teddy Roosevelt launched the Bull Moose Party.

There is very deep and serious political disaffection in this country, particularly in the American Midwest. The Midwest is ripe for another third-party or independent candidate to come sweeping through in 2008.

The Democrats have no chance of becoming a national party representative of the broad mass of the the People. The Republicans still could, but they have to pull their heads out on the border.

[SJackson]

"As of today, which one of the following issues will be the most important in deciding your vote for Congress this fall:"

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House

John Conyers, Jr, Chairman, House Judiciary Committee

Tom Lantos, Chairman, House International Relations Committee

David R. Obey, Chairman, House Committee on Appropriations

John Dingell, Chairman House Energy and Commerce Committee

Chaplain for the US House of Representatives??

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee

Jay Rockefeller, Chairman, Senate Intelligence Committee

Robert C. Byrd, Chairman, Senate Appropriations Committee

John F. Kerry, Chairman US Senate Committee on Finance

John F. Kerry, Chairman Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

Joseph Biden, Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Carl Levin, Chairman Senate Armed Services Committee

Senate Chaplain???

[maine-iac7]

hmmm - maybe it's YOUR inability to follow the rule - if you are being sarcastic - you put that note on your post - otherwise, take flak

[maine-iac7]

sorry - didn't mean to defame 'people'