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.
BRAVO!!!!
THANK you for that post, Tator. Needed to be said louder.
These people are willing to damage this country and the conservative cause to teach the RINO's a lesson.
It is a despicable, indefensible position, IMO, and the people who espouse it should be treated accordingly..........as enemies of this nation, and of conservatism.
hmmm... depends on where one is stationed, I guess.
Convincing you is not my intention as it is hard to convince those with a biased and misinformed point of view. I'm merely responded to your blind allegiance to a President who is currently way off course and out of step with 80% of the American people. On this issue (not the Iraq war; not the economy) Bush is contributing to the erosion of the GOP. I have been a Republican all my life and supported Bush twice. I support Bush on Iraq and war on terror. I certainly have a right to express my point of view on Bush's stand on immigration.
In terms of where you really are on the conservative scale perhaps you could give us your position on Ohio Senators DeWine and Voinovich. That will tell me all I need to know.
I've lived in Ohio most of my life and have always detested both of them as they are RINOs of the first order. What say you?
Or will we just get more of Bush Uberalis!
Yes, so many on FR try to claim that those who speak the truth are "stabbing in the back," and imply that we should just meekly trust the emperor. Identifying problems and solutions is considered treason in that theory, much like you'll see on FR.
^
President Bush is about as far from arrogant, as you call him, as he could possibly be.
He is fair, compassionate, and he tells the truth. When he says something, he means it, and sticks to his decisions.
I'm very proud to have voted for him. It was an honor.
In with the proposals of border security, however, have been mandates to educate illegals, etc. I'd like to get a link to the portion of the Constitution that authorizes the Congress or the President to force me to pay to educate the citzens of other countries!
GWBush remains Mexico's best hope. He remains the best hope of the racist Spanish elites of that awful country who push their unwanted brown skin and Indian people into the United States of America.
I'll answer.
DeWine is a RINO.
Now let me ask you a question
DeWine the RINO just beat a conservative anti-illegal alien challenger in his primary. DeWine got 74% of the vote.
Based on that what do you think is the position of the people in Ohio about DeWine?
I seem to be getting rather beat up and bloodied on this thread.
Thank you for standing up for me.
Not if this article has any sprinkling of truth ... http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=14965
Relax, that is ridiculous fear mongering. I am sorry that John Corsi fell for stuff like that.
"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."
===
But at least you learned from your mistake.
The sad part is that so many didn't and WANT and ADVOCATE repeating exactly the Perot disaster that gave us 8 years of CLinton, some openly advocate that it would be better to help the Dems take power. These people are either deluded, or part of the Dem movement to get conservatives to stay home or vote third party, precisely to help the Dems win.
Read this article and tell me, if some of the posters here don't fit the description:
The new 'Republicans vote on Wednesday' game (FR Mentioned) (article full text)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1613957/posts?page=87#87
But there seems to be a new “Republicans vote on Wednesday” taking form in time for the 2006 election. This effort targets grassroots conservatives known for their passionate views about issues who may be open to a grassroots voting rebellion. But the effort is being led, or at the very least aided, by liberals pretending to be grassroots conservatives, as opposed to actual grassroots conservatives themselves.
The premise follows a scheme previously found most often on talk radio programs: a liberal activist calls a conservative radio host, such as Rush Limbaugh or Laura Ingraham, and delivers the line: “I’ve been voting Republican for 30 years, but I’ve finally had it and I’m not voting this year.” Or my favorite: “I’m a Reagan Republican, but I’m fed up and voting for John Kerry.” (Because that is what Reagan Republicans would do, vote for John Kerry.) At this point, the host usually asks a couple of questions and it becomes painfully obvious that the supposed Reagan Republican has probably never voted for anyone left of Michael Dukakis.
The intentions are clear: the caller hopes to make it appear as though there is already a large uprising of conservatives who are rebelling against GOP candidates, and thus, wishes to incite other Republicans to pick up the same attitude and pass it along, leading to the Democrat becoming more competitive. The successes of such a strategy on voting habits are unclear, especially given that the conservative radio host often refutes the caller’s talking points.
But the pretend-conservative act is being carried onto a whole new playing field, one that has become wildly influential over the past few years and one that does not stand to be instantly recognized as a fake. That playing field is the blogosphere, which is then used in conjunction with massive e-mailings to “spread the word” (as one e-mailer insisted I do to my readers/e-mail list) to other conservatives.
The concept is the same: the blog or e-mail claims, first, that the said writer has been a conservative for years and that they have “had it with Republicans.” They then point to an issue that conservatives would likely be upset about such as excessive spending, immigration, or the expansion of government. Their supposed rage over the issue has convinced them to either not show up to vote in 2006, or, in order to really show Republicans, vote for the Democrat instead.
You misread it, it's Prodi that we don't know where he stands -- or rather we do, right with the terrorists. One of his first acts was to declare withdrawal of Italy's troops from Iraq immediately.
" If he can't put America first, he has no business being president of the USA."
==
Please direct me to your posts where you criticized the DEMOCRATS, since ALL of the Dem presidential hopefuls and most in Congress put THEIR political ambitions over the good of the country.
How often have you criticized them?
President Bush had proposed that illegal aliens should also be able to collect Social Security benefits for any work they'd done in Mexico.
I guess Hillary raffling through the FBI files of her political enemies makes your warm all over, but the NSA looking through phone numbers to detect terrorists makes you cringe.
BTW here is a great article about how the network of terrorist contacts is discovered.
Geek's' 9/11 analysis sheds light on NSA activities
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1635745/posts
antoher article of note:
The Real Crime
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1635699/posts
In case you missed it, post 46 by Jedidah is a superb, appropriate reply to the whiners. Read the whole thing, to get the flavor. It's the perfect response.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1635762/posts?page=46#46
Perhaps because they saw what happened under George W. Bush's leadership when the world united against them before, hmmm?
The President has not changed. Some people have bought into the constant, unrelenting media lies about the man, though.
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.