Conservatives sitting out 2006 hurts the GOP’s right, not the RINOs

National Reviews ^ | May 15, 2006 | Jim Geraghty

[patriciaruth]

I've also been insane hoping that people that run on on tenet actually follow through on that. ; )

Some do, and if you want to join them in the colliseum with the lions, that is your choice.

Me, I'm with Patton. Let the other fool die or lose for HIS country, Islamic party, or communist dupe party.

We've chosen to sneak up on the enemy line and pick them off one at a time, not giving away our position.

[taxed2death]

"You're not breaking anything to me I haven't heard before. There have been many here forecasting gloom and doom. I for one am not going for it.

You tell me how giving up one or both Houses to the Dems is going to improve the problems that our country faces."


______________________________________________

It makes no difference. None at all.

You tell me how making 12 million illegals citizens who can then each bring in 16 family members is "going to improve the problems our country faces now".

Do you HONESTLY think these people will vote Republican?

Remember where they are coming from. The only thing they know is socialism...and the crappiest corrupt form of socialism at that.

[jazusamo]

There's a whole lot more at stake than just illegal immigration and if the Dems control one or both Houses you and all of us will find out just how much difference it will make, and it won't be good. I'm more than a one issue voter.

Also, what makes you think the Dems will make the illegal thing any better if they control one or both Houses?

[taxed2death]

First, to think that illegal immigration is a "single issue" is myopic. If I have to explain why...then don't waste your time, just stop reading here.

If the Dums wind up controlling both houses, 10 years from now it will not make a damned bit of difference. None.

The Dems will not make the illegal "thing" any better". But having GWB sign a law that grants "an earned pathway to citizenship" is absolutely the worst possible scenario.

Try to think of the effect of
12,000,000 or
14,000,000 or
22,000,000 illegals petitioning 16 family members each to come in.

Do the math. Use the low number...even though everyone knows it's bogus...
12,000,000 X 16 = one helluva lot of Dumocrats.

Do not confuse what I am saying either. I do NOT want the Dums to win either house back......... What I AM saying is that if GWB signs "Shamnesty" or "Earned citizenship" into law....10 years from now it will not matter who has control of what house...the Republican party will be finished for years and years to come.

[jazusamo]

I see what you're saying and agree with you on the granting of an amnesty. I think the President's plan outlined in his speech is basically good except for the amnesty that he says is not an amnesty. I don't get involved in the immigration threads usually because it's a complex thing and no one is going to be 100% happy with any plan,IMO.

I believe what he has proposed is more than any previous President has done, the problem has been ignored by all of them and it's to the point now that it's a crisis. It would be nice to deport all illegals but realistically speaking it's not going to happen.

I guess what bothers me most are the people that want to let the Dems take power to teach Repubs a lesson, that is silly logic as far as I'm concerned.

[Quix]

At this point, am most reminded by the

--out of the frying pan/into hell;

--bite-my-nose-to-spite-my-face;

--jump-off-the-bridge-'cause-I-couldn't-have-the-car-keys-to-go-boozin;

--if-I-have-to-share-my-toys-I'll-just-burn-the-house-down

. . .

arguments . . . that . . . sadly, the DIMRATS are not the only ones with a raft of folks who need to grow up and radically improve their reality testing!

[Quix]

But perhaps a GOP loss in one of the two houses may be a silver lining for '08.
- - - -

I very much disagree. We canNOT afford it at this crucial time in this crucial era--as outlined in this post below.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1635546/posts?page=503#503

[nopardons]

No, I didn't "forget" to add Souter to the list; he was placed on the SCOTUS thanks to a GOP president and it wasn't President George W. Bush! I was listing things that DEMS would do. But then, you are incapable of reasoning and logic.

You have NO idea what Myers would have been like. She is the one who picked out and vetted ALL of President Bush's CONSERVATIVE judge nominees. Yeah, she's some kind of a lost liberal, hiding out undercover. ROTFLOL...you people are certainly consistent; consistently nuts!

There was NOTHING inherently wrong with the "port deal", as you ERRONEOUSLY call it! You don't understand anything that you're attempting to use to smear me and the president with. No wonder you are so bloody wrong about EVERYTHING! ;^)

President Bush isn't running for any office. He can't run for president again. Try THINKING, for a change and stop "feeling", as damned Dems do!

[Walkingfeather]

You are the one that is trying to get people to stop thinking. Don't think about Illegals
Don't think about Spending
Don't think about Restriction on political speach
Don't think about ........

All your name calling is not going to change the fact that the president that has had the highest popularity has sunk to one of the lowest. THAT IS A FACT. THERE IS a reason, and it will continue until those like you ( but are actually significant) go and find out the problems and then fix them.

Reagan didnt blow off the conservatives in the 70's he listened and guess what? He was elected, and got things through democratic house and senates while destroying the USSR.

Wake up it is your pride that blinds you.

[nopardons]

Oh gee...still seeing things that are not there, are you? Your delusions are getting worse, I fear. And if anyone here is not only blind, but blinkered and deaf, it is you and in spades!

Reagan was ridiculed and insulted and called names and reviled by "his base", in his second term. Heck, some "purists" did so during his first term.

Oh goody, let's all talk endlessly about President Bush's falling push polled numbers, shall we? Let's go and drag him out of the White House and yell in his face. /sarcasm

Not that I agree, but Harry Truman had lower favorable ratings and now many historians claim that he was a terrific president.

Go learn some factual history!

[Walkingfeather]

My arguement is with not only Bush but the Repubs in general. This is politics. Politics has rules... well guidelines because there are no real rules in politics.

You mock me for saying that the Republicans have ignored thier base. You have not denied that they have. So we will just accept that as a fact. So now the question is what do conservatives do about that?

Here is where you generally leave for your sabatical to Planet X. I say, why put conservative money, time, effort into campaigns of people that promised they would bring certain legislation into law and didnt?

You say, "ignore the fact that they not only didnt bring legislation you wanted but supported legislation you didn't, Give them more money and vote them back in."

Okay fair enough, We will let our fine audience watching from home decide who is delusional.

In the mean time Johnny, tell "Nopardons" what he has won!

Well he has won his very own apathetic representitive!!! That's right! ( applauss here) He will watch as his elected representitive no longer has to worry about actually Listening NOR ACT in the best interests of the people who vote for him, he is free to just get lobbied by special interests all day long,( and taken care of by the friendly girls that the democrats brought to the same cocktail party) and never needs to answer to them at all. Seeing that his motivation to act in the best interest of those back home has now been totally eleminated by knowing that he can be re-elected and not follow through.

Yessirree Monte those are some terrific departing gifts but there is more.... A years supply of Turtle wax and Rice a Roni the san fransisco treat.

Enjoy.

[zbigreddogz]

Thanks for posting this, although it's insanely obvious to anybody who thinks about it with more then their emotions.

[nathanbedford]

Ward Churchill, your scholarship is flawed. You quoted many sentences of one of my paragraphs but left out one that alters the whole meaning.

Why don't you supply for the readers of the thread? You know where it is just as you know why you left it out.

[Fruitbat]

Some do, and if you want to join them in the colliseum with the lions, that is your choice.

Me, I'm with Patton. Let the other fool die or lose for HIS country, Islamic party, or communist dupe party.

We've chosen to sneak up on the enemy line and pick them off one at a time, not giving away our position.

Yeah, and pretty soon you're going to be the only ones fighting the war as the nation becomes more and more lib, more and more Mexicans, more and more absurd. Meanwhile, you enjoy yourself in the bushes. LOL

I think I'd welcome a 100% incumbent turnover.

[Fruitbat]

I very much disagree. We canNOT afford it at this crucial time in this crucial era--as outlined in this post below. (from 167)

Well, at this rate, GOP will be lib in ten years. GOP today is as lib as the libs were in the late 70s/early 80s. At least the Senate, although not talking about the House.

We need term limits!!!

[LurkLongley]

The daily hysteria surrounding the immigration issue, and the constant barrage of gloom coming from all of the conservative leaders, media, and (sad to say) much of the grassroots, has combined to drown out the real story that needs to be told to the American people.

What gets me the most crazy is that we are complicit in this. We love to bemoan the slant of the MSM, but with our near constant Bush bashing on immigration, we are making their jobs so much easier. Really, sometimes I wonder if a bunch of DUmmies have invaded FR posing as p*ssed off conservatives. Why are we letting a single issue derail the numerous reasons that we have to be proud of what this administration HAS accomplished.

I've been a long time lurker (see the screen name) and never really thought about posting replies until the last couple of months. This was the site that I came to to get a laugh, some support for my own ideas, and feel the comraderie of some like-minded individuals who understood the need for liberty and personal responsibility. Especially during the 2000 election aftermath, and after 9-11, FR was a haven from the MSM where a conservative could read some news and analysis and get the spirit buoyed up. Now, however, I cringe whenever I see an illegal immigration post. I can almost see the posts that will appear, and the dissention that accompanies it.

Get over it, people! I am totally against illegal immigration, and amnesty, and the cultural/social costs of it stagger me, but I REFUSE to let that one issue rule my thinking and actions. Without this President (who has not said anything other than what he says now about this topic) we would not have:

* The War on Islamofacism
* A signifigant tax cut
* A booming economy
* Pride in our Armed Forces
* Integrity in the White House
* A start on curbing the power of the Judiciary
* A true friend of the Culture of Life
* A CIC who does not govern via polling data

and a host of other things that we said (say) we wanted prior to this administration.

I think that everyone here would agree that the Dims running Washington would be a disaster, and we are the ones who can prevent that from happening, just as we can keep her Thighness from EVER holding the keys to the executive branch. So let's agree to disagree, but hopefully not lose sight of the bigger goal which is the greatness of this nation.

[LurkLongley]

Why?

For the same reason that he stood for the WOT, conservative judges, the culture of life and all of his other main policy initiatives; because that is what he has said all along that he would do!

We all got the President that we voted for. All of the things that he said he stood for have never changed, including this one. Is he perfect? He** no. Could we have found a more conservative candidate? He** yes! (I worked on Alan Keyes campaign) But, he is the candidate that we put up, and then elected. We need to support him, tell him when we think he's wrong, and work to get an even more conservative candidate the next time around.

Losing to the Dims is a much worse alternative!

[Quix]

I certainly believe that we need term limits.

Getting them is not going to be very easy, it appears.

Have a blessed weekend.

Qx

[Fruitbat]

Yeah, you too!

No, it won't be easy. The only way is to keep voting in challengers that say they'll support them.

Either way, the American people need to wrest the control of their country back from the politicians who are usurping it! How that gets accomplished and whether or not it happens before the GOP becomes as lib as the Dims were 20 years ago remains to be seen.

[patriciaruth]

I think I'd welcome a 100% incumbent turnover.

Well, of course you would.

That would mean the Democrats would control the House and Senate and White House.

Have a nice day dreaming about it.