Agreed! But there are many flamers here. Although they have talked me out of voting for Dubya in '08! I was gonna! </sarc>
Posted on 05/21/2006 12:53:53 AM PDT by FairOpinion
President George W. Bush strides across the world stage as much as the U.S. dominates the world's stage.
This is very good news for those of us who still believe in decency and democracy.
So forget what some slanted opinion polls say about the leadership of the 43rd president and his patriot countrymen.
Recall, Sir Winston Churchill was once one of the most detested men in Britain, then went on to save the free world.
That's Churchill's undisputed legacy.
In another era it may be Bush's legacy, too.
This past week, Australian Prime Minister John Howard, one of America's strongest allies, was in Washington on a state visit.
He was hailed by one and all in the nation's capital.
Later, Howard was in Ottawa to visit America's latest allies, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the newly elected Conservative government of Canada.
And we all know British Prime Minister Tony Blair is also one of Bush's -- and America's -- strongest allies.
Bush and America have many other allies throughout the world, too, although to read the nauseating Lib-Left news media, one would get the impression Bush is a pariah and America a rogue state.
Well, would you rather have the likes of Communist China, Communist North Korea, or Communist Cuba soldiering the world?
How about Middle East sheikdoms such as Iran, Libya, or Yemen running the show.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has already let it be known when his nation gets its hands on nuclear weapons he will use them against the Western democracies.
North Korea's president Kim Jong-il boasts he already has nuclear weapons and is building intercontinental ballistic missiles to carry them to western countries.
Back in the 1960s, Castro tried to install Soviet missiles on his island nation aimed at Canada and the U.S.
Do you honestly believe Bush, Blair, Howard and the like do not have a duty to safeguard us against these types.
Or would you rather have a stack of African dictatorships in charge -- nations ravaged by tribal warfare with their hands constantly out for billions of dollars in western aid that invariably is used to build luxurious palaces and deposited in secretive Swiss banks.
Vladimir Putin's Russia is a mess -- democracy there is in danger -- and old Soviet-style hawks want to take it back to the days of Stalinism.
Many of its non-Eastern European vassal states are in a mess, too, governed by local chieftains.
In Latin America bullies such as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez are on the rise.
Their hero, Fidel Castro, lives in luxury while his people continue to live under decades of food rationing.
India and Pakistan -- always at each other's throats, and courtesy of past Canadian Liberal regimes loaded with nuclear missiles -- pose a constant threat to that part of the world.
In Italy, we just lost Silvio Berlusconi, one of Bush's and America's best friends, in favour of left-winger Romano Ponti, and we don't know where he stands on preserving the international rule of law.
In Spain, when the Conservative government of Jose Maria Aznar fell, and Socialist Jose Zapatero came into power, the Spanish quickly capitulated to Islamic terrorist blackmail.
Thankfully, NATO and Norad are still holding together, and some perceptive Europeans leaders are even talking about a missile shield against rogue nations similar to the one proposed by Bush and rejected by weak-kneed types such as the Jean Chretien/Paul Martin Liberals.
Gutless, every one of them.
Talk about 21st century Neville Chamberlains!
So we're left basically with Bush, Blair and Howard and whatever smaller nations such as freed Soviet slave states in the European Union can pull together.
Yes, we've all read in the midst of this international war on terror that Bush has slipped this month to an all-time low in opinion polls at just 29%.
But recall that back in 1951 during another war on terror -- the attempt to prevent Josef Stalin's hordes from advancing into Western Europe and the all-out effort to save South Korea from advancing Communist North Korean forces, backed by Red China -- Democratic President Harry Truman fell to 23% in the polls.
The anti-America mobs can howl all they like, but I'm sticking with Bush, Blair, Howard and other true leaders of the western democracies.
I hope you are, too.
Uh, yeah. Mexicans are Nazis. Thanks for playing.
That's a fine way to talk to a woman expressing her opinions. Just because you disagree with her is no reason to talk to her like that. You should be ashamed of yourself. But I suppose you will tell me the same, so I doubt you are.
Your "my party can do no wrong or if they do I should't say anything about it" cause it's just ankle-biting creates the credibilty problem.
Guess I know how Zell Miller feels.
I couldn't disagree with your position more, though. The president MUST do more than the war, and social security is a disaster waiting to happen. He can do more than one thing at a time, and I think he has. Iraq is such a precarious situation that a great deal of finesse is needed. Iraq MUST be allowed to stand on its own two feet; if it is propped up too much, it will be seen as a US puppet, and so much of the hard work your husband and others did will be for nothing.
I've never agreed with the "We are at war and cannot simply go about our daily lives as though everything is fine and normal" position. If everyone here in the US were miserable, would that ameliorate the pain of those who always suffer the most in a war, the soldiers? How? The soldiers are doing such a good job so that the US can BE the US, so their loved ones and especially children can grow up, even for the time their dads and moms aren't around, as normally as possible. (Would any soldier want his family to suffer, for his kids to be deprived of even more than his absence, while he's away?)
I don't get this attitude; neither do several vets of my acquainatance, one a combat vet in Vietnam. To me, the fact that we here at home can go about our business shows the greatness of our society, which they are fighting to protect. For the sake of argument, let's say we were made to suffer by jacking up taxes, slowing the economy, people being tossed out of work, misery going up, etc. How would this help the soldiers? By spreading the misery around? It doesn't work that way--would the soldiers feel better over there if they knew we were suffering more over here, and needlessly?
I know my position isn't popular with you, your husband or some of his fellow soldiers, but I've never been able (nor have those vets I've personally known been able) to understand that mindset.
More to the point, I don't think Bush has dropped the ball once. He can't just get up in front of the TV cameras every single day and say "We are at war." We KNOW we are at war, except those who don't read or watch the news, and nothing is going to force them to connect to that reality.
I think the average Joe on the street is a lot smarter than you give him credit for. It's just too easy to say "I'm not feeling the love, so it's all you dummies!" I guess I don't understand, in concrete terms, what specifically you're asking for--to see people out of work, to see more anti-war protests, taxes raised and the economy collapsing?
I'm not putting words in your mouth, but in the absence of an explanation I'm just thinking on the screen here. And I admit I just don't get it.
Whining wives who think it's all about them we don't need in the military. We're supposed to be the support so our troops can do their job without having to worry about what's happening at home. I've spent over half my life keeping the home fires burning as a military wife and mother so I know what I'm talking about, obviously you don't.
They won't have to come marching. The liberal policies of the majority of politicians are allowing them to take over by attrition. Witness allowing prayer calls over loudspeakers early in the morning near Detroit.
I would vote against another Bush. We need an American president not a global president.
Be my guest - I'm not voting for him again. Twice was enough...;-)
Yes we need an American president, not a Mexican, Chinese or Indian one. If he can't put America first, he has no business being president of the USA.
What utter arrogance. No wonder you love Bush. He's arrogant too.
How many people have argued that Bush doesn't make the laws - Congress does? Yet, you seem to equate Bush to a demi-god making him all powerful. Giving him prescient abilities. Declaring him master of the Universe.
Geez give me a break!!!
Bump.
"In Italy, we just lost Silvio Berlusconi, one of Bush's and America's best friends, in favour of left-winger Romano Ponti, and we don't know where he stands on preserving the international rule of law."
This one cracks me up. Really. Silvio Berlusconi, committed to the preservation of international rule of [i]law[/i] ?
Here is a big picture to keep in perspective:
I disagree with W on several issues.
I ALSO remember voting for Perot, thus electing the Clintons.
I do not repeat mistakes. If the Republicans ran Mickey Mouse, I would never repeat the Perot Disaster.
I lived with the knowledge for eight miserable years the damage a Third Party did, and my complicity in it.
Sigh, yeah, that was in one of my rants that I couldn't bring myself to punch the post button...
One of the lenses I use is "how would I feel about this if it was Clinton doing it" and signing CRF was one that sent me into orbit.
I worked for Bush both times and even went to Ohio on my own dime as part of the Might Texas Strike Force. I've worked in every election cycle since Goldwater and have been on more than one party platform commitee. 40 years of building a "conservative" party (those that haven't should read the party platform, IMO it's a fine conservative document), living through Nixon (did he ever have a conservative thought?), and here in Texas starting out having the state convention in a phone booth and we finally get a majority and, well, to paraphrase Pogo we have met the liberals and he is us.
But then I am just another cranky old guy, what the hell do I know. Aparently nothing, just another whiner who shouldn't speak up about concerns about the country we'll leave to future generations.
He cut taxes which increased revenue, we are humming along economically and we have not had another attack..
The NSA and CIA nor the administration have told me exactly how we have avoided the attacks..but the MSM and certain treasonous leakers are sure trying to reveal the methods or sometimes spread lies about some of them..
The media need to increase circulation and others would rather the country be hit than have Bush succeed.
God Bless America, Our Troops and Our President.
Agreed! But there are many flamers here. Although they have talked me out of voting for Dubya in '08! I was gonna! </sarc>
but I'm sticking with Bush, Blair, Howard and other true leaders of the western democracies.
Me Too!
Thanks for posting!
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.