Posted on 05/22/2006 6:16:18 PM PDT by M. Thatcher
Quite frankly, that is one of the most disgusting things I have read on FR posted by a Freeper.
Let me tell you something: George Bush would have gladly been a one-term president if he could have saved the lives of all of those killed on September 11, 2001.
I have made some life long friends from folks I have met here at FR. I know their kids, I know their Moms. Real folks I hang out with in real life.
None of them are exactly like me. No one is.
On political issues, even immigration, we have our differences. But, we have enough common ground that we stick together.
I have no problem with anyone having disagreements with some of the policies of President Bush and their other elected representatives. There are, though, reasonable ways to express those differences.
By design, American politics do not turn on a dime. Change is slow, difficult and requires a lot of hard work. We have the government we the people elected. We can change it, just not tomorrow.
With President Bush, as with those I choose to share my life with, I celebrate what we have in common.
Wow! Very nice article. I am sick of the self-proclaimed "base," which acts like nothing but a pack of howling dogs, inciting each other with their own howling.
I almost wonder if one of Bush's mistakes has been that he gave them (the extremists) the courtesy of listening to them or asking them some input in the first place. Reagan just ignored them.
And as for their being the "base," I doubt it. When I worked on the campaign, I met many people (on the GOP voters list) who told me they would never vote for him - in fact, they hadn't voted for anybody since Ross Perot. But I will bet you a lot of these very same people are the ones who are now out there proclaiming that they are Bush's "base."
Very well done.
We will miss G.W.Bush one day the same way me miss the Gipper.
I know. And its too bad.
She lost me with the Miers paragraph. Waaaay off the mark.
Sorry, but the article did mention immigration. And then the poster in question was hit with this response:
But I do wish you Johny-one-notes
But you only call him on a very measured response to how the other poster responded to him.
So you're only calling the fouls for one side here, apparently.
Your side has no problem dishing it out, don't complain when you get it back in kind.
This is a FANTASTIC article, and right on the money.
President Bush, "In essentials....... is very much what he ever was."
Those who are crying "Betrayed!" are the betrayers. He has not changed..........they have.
Bravo, good article.
Your lack of knowledge of history AND the two men, Reagan and Bush, is astounding, jla.
He is the FIRST President to take the immigration problem seriously.
If they were spending it on nation building and warfare, we wouldn't have an issue. They're spendin' it at home on pork.
You don't debate like a conservative - you debate like someone who hates President Bush ...
And the converse is true as well. There has never been an opportunity for people who hate the President to come together either. This President has endured hatred well beyond anything Nixon or Reagan had to endure. It isn't even close with Reagan.
And if you think this forum supports him, you haven't been paying attention. The OWNER of the forum does, because he is wise, but there is as much vitriol and hatred of this President right here as there is on the left. The only difference is that the rules of the forum prevent the haters from being obscene and screaming for impeachment, and they get banned when they go over the line here.
Other than the outward controls of the decent people who run this Free Republic, the hate from some here is as bad as it is anywhere.
This article is spot on. The President hasn't changed. Those who have turned against him with a vengeance have.
Yes, that's our man. And he's a real man. That's just one of the reasons the media hates him. What a bunch of metrosexual twits.
With all of the complaints people have with immigration, a critical comment was made yesterday by someone in the know that sheds new light on the 'balanced' stance President Bush is taking with immigration. Two words- Hugo Chavez.
He (Chavez) has been pushing to influence Mexico and it may be a brilliant strategy to have a far more balanced approach to the immigration issue than to play hard nose, shut them off, and let them become a puppet of Chavez.
More info forthcoming, but from the whispers I've heard, this is a big factor in why we aren't marching every illegal to the border and putting up a line of tanks..
I'm sure the anti-Bushbots won't care, but for the rest of us, it does offer an interesting thing to think about..
It's not something a decent person does to someone he should treat with respect........someone like President Bush who has very much EARNED our respect.
When the 'base' blends in with DU and it's impossible to tell the difference, there is something wrong with the 'base'.......NOT with the President.
The Chavez angle makes much sense. Mexico is weak and corrupt. To have them under communist control would make the problem far worse than it already is.
Food for thought.
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.