"I WANT YOU...
...TO STAY AT HOME ELECTION DAY!"
Posted on 05/11/2006 12:31:45 AM PDT by FairOpinion
I agree, I enjoy drinking a beer or two with my friends after work. Voting cuts into my beer drinking time. Give me a reason to vote and I will go vote, otherwise it's Miller Time.
"When you've been in Congress for a while, or the White House for a while, you both forget too many things and learn too many things.
You forget why they sent you. You forget it's not that you're charming and wonderful. You forget it's not you. You become immersed in a Washington conversation, a political conversation, that is, by definition, unlike the normal human conversation back home."
Oh Peggy, I know this editorial is aimed at President Bush.
I ask you, do you really think President Bush has forgotten. Do you really think President Bush and Laura Bush have forgotten who and why they are in the White House. Shame on ya!!!
Your writings were always very fluffy, full of wordies, with 3/4 of what you wrote needless to get to the point.
What is your point here - other than sour grapes.
If you really think Republicans will sit out elections just to 'show them' then you don't really know Republicans/Conservatives. And I really resent your insinuating such.
Do some good in your next writings will you, expose the media and you know what I mean.
You can either practice swishing your hair and tilting your head in the Peggy Noonan way or surprise me and write something that will do some damage to the you know what ----- hint----
DBM
After conservatives punished "read-my-lips" George, we got 4 years of Clinton. Then we got 4 more years of Clinton, and then 4 years of RINO Dubya, and 4 more years of RINO Dubya. When does the party learn the lesson the conservative think they are sending?
uh ... how 'bout say you are going to do something about our borders? or, better still, actually do something (so we know you're not just another !hillary).
how 'bout doing something to ensure fair elections? they got purple ink in iraq; why can't we get some here?
gee. now that wouldn't resonate with a conservative base, would it?
these are huge and OBVIOUS problems that are undermining our very society and nation, even more so than events in the middle east, SCREAMING for action, but the all the pubs can say is: "gosh, why are people so upset?"
ugh.
...TO STAY AT HOME ELECTION DAY!"
Very unlikely, Bush is commited to open borders with Mexico and Canada. Without Bush's backing there is no chance that the policy of open borders will change during his presidency. So you can forget that. (Might beef up enforcement a little bit in an attempt to remove illegals that commit crimes in the usa.)
Fair election
Well, the house refused to get rid of the bilingual ballots just today, so I think you can forget that too.
Any other ideas?
She long abandoned the idea of fighting. She's been in this defeatist mode since Bush was inaugurated to a second term.
you're making ms noonan's case.
President Bush judicial appointments are top rate.
Boycotting elections is not going to help advance the conservative agenda.
She is in New York surrounded by libs, probably idea of flyover country or its values system.
that because I agree with her, I think the best we can do is take the immigration issue into the 08 election. Until then we rasie hell with the GOP so that the GOP knows it faces certain defeat in 08 if it does not nominate someone good on conservative issues.
Agreed, we really need to keep the House, since there are lot's of good conservatives in the House, leadership sucks, but the back benchers are good.
A Democrat victory of any sort in November would be a calamity.
A Democrat victory in November is at least a distinct possibility if not a likelihood.
We differ, evidently, on the following:
I believe a Democrat victory in November will become a reality if the Republicans in the House and the Senate do not radically change their ways. That means they must return to their base, they must take effective steps to stop unrestrained, uncontrolled immigration. That means, in short, they must seal the border. It means they must take effective steps to drain the illegal aliens out of the country with measures aimed at employers who seek to gain unfair commercial advantage with cheap illegal labor. It means they must restrain spending, the last Senate bill on the budget was worse than an extravagance, it was an affront.
I said we differ on this but it may be that we just differ on whether we should talk about it. My feeling is that the sands are running out on the Republicans and they must act vigorously and dramatically to save their souls because if they do not regain their souls they will surely lose the election.
So I see Peggy Noonan's column as directed not so much at the faithful ranks of conservatives who soldier on despite betrayals by their own leaders but directed at those leaders themselves. This is an inside the Beltway column. A wake-up call if you will.
Ms. Noonan has described in her column how the elected representatives from the right forget their base. Can you deny that as a class in these Republicans have become deaf to their conservative constituents?
I've been on record on this forum decrying Bush's declensions on the issue of immigration since before the last presidential election. For some time now I've been on record in this forum posting that Bush is not primarily a conservative but something quite different. Many conservatives such as I have come to the conclusion that unrestrained immigration represents a mortal threat to the Republican Party. Worse, it is an assault on every conservative principle that is inextricably linked to our sovereignty. The next stop is the melding of the American nation into a North American "region." Thus, the immigration issue is as great a threat to America as the war on terror is-and I am on record on these threads declaring the war on terrorism represents an existential threat to America because of the disastrous potential in the use of atomic weapons.
For many conservatives I think the jump the shark moment occurred with the nomination of Harriet Meirs. Many came to recognize that there are other motivations which have primary sway over George Bush before principles of conservatism. Most of us have been willing to look the other way to give the commander in chief the support he needs to fight the war on terrorism and to fashion tax cuts as well as make some very good judicial appointments.
I for one believe that Bush and our elected representatives have presumed too much on the base and that they will lose the base if they do not radically turn in a conservative direction.
I think the difference between us is that I believe the only way to save the party is the frankly discuss these issues in the hope, probably forlorn, that these representatives will finally get the wax out of their ears.
Doin' what we been doin' ain't working.
Anyone who thinks President Bush's 2004 inaugural speech was "too preachy" doesn't understand Bush's deep-rooted faith and love for this country and the people in it and the fact this great country of ours lost it's moral compass during the 8 year nightmare that was Bill Clinton's presidency. She lost all credibility with me with that particular opinion piece.
All the more reason for the Republican politicians to get their act together and act upon their stated conservative priciples.
It's not too late for '06.
Ouch. That is going to leave a mark.
Noonan hits another home run. Truer words have never been spoken.
That hurt.
Don't you think Bush-bashing is well deserved? Bush to this day is still clueless about defending our borders and restraining spending.
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.