Posted on 08/23/2006 8:52:59 AM PDT by angcat
SOME WEDNESDAY SPIN! Most in US see no tie between Iraq, terror war: poll Tue Aug 22, 10:29 PM ET A majority of Americans no longer see a link between the war in Iraq and Washington's broader anti-terrorism efforts despite President George W. Bush's insistence the two are intertwined, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll released on Tuesday. Fifty-one percent of those surveyed said the war in Iraq was separate from the U.S. government's war on terrorism. The findings were a considerable shift from polls taken in 2002 and early 2003, when a majority considered the two to be linked, The New York Times said. As recently as June, opinion was evenly split, with 41 percent on both sides of the divide. Now only 32 percent considered Iraq to be a major part of the fight against terrorism, the newspaper said. According to the poll, 46 percent said the Bush administration had concentrated too heavily on Iraq and not enough on terrorists elsewhere. Fifty-three percent said going to war in the first place was a mistake, up from 48 percent in July, The New York Times said. Bush's approval ratings remained unchanged at 36 percent. His popularity has been damaged by the unpopular war in Iraq, in which the U.S. military death toll is 2,610. As recently as Monday, Bush defended the invasion of Iraq as crucial to preventing more domestic terror attacks. "If you believe that the job of the federal government is to secure this country, it's really important for you to understand that success in Iraq is part of securing the country," Bush said during a news conference. The unpopularity of the Iraq war has many Republicans nervous about the party's chances in the November midterm elections in which Democrats are seeking to retake control of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate. The Times/CBS News poll of 1,206 adults was conducted Thursday through Monday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
I don't know about hosting a show solo, but I hear him every week (usually Thursday) on the Hugh Hewitt Show.
So save the country at all costs and to h**l with the traditional values that the founders fought to instill in the country that they fought, bled, and died to create? When that's all over, it won't be the country you wanted to save. Throwing away the traditional values that made the country possible, isn't an acceptable loss in winning the war, and they arenot exclusive, they are completely compatable. And the social values that make the GOP plank what it is, are necessary to win the war because they make the GOP what the founders intended for the country to be like, and justify its existance. RINOs do not reflect most Republican voters values. If they did, there wouldn't be majority frustration among Republican voters towards Congressional RINOs. That speaks for itself. Giuliani is a RINO and does not reflect red State values. He's a nice guy, but the bottom line is, after a reality check, he's a RINO former Mayor, from a big blue city, in a big blue state, from a part of the country that hasn't had a national leader as President since Kennedy. Giuliani doesn't even reflect the values of most Americans, not to mention most Republicans. There hasn't been a New England President since Kennedy and that's no coinsidence.
Well said!!!
Sounds good.
I love you - but responding to someone who simply cuts and pastes the same comments over and over is pointless.
I get your point of view.
No need to respond to each other any longer.
God bless - good luck.
Yeah, but the real whip in DC these days is withholding of money...But punishing the GOP NOW is counterproductive unless you WANT the Congress impeaching the President...hard to go into the streets marching when we WANT to retain the majority...at least I want to maintain the majority.
I don't see that either, and in the primaries it will be made clear just how RINO liberal he is socially, and it's silly to think that most Republican voters will choose a social dove as President when there are social conservative Hawks who are as strong on the war as Giuliani. Why get half of what Republicans want with Giuliani when they can get the whole package with someone like Allen or Tancredo or some other REAL conservative like Gingrich? It's a crazy argument. His stand on the big issues will come into play, and just because he supports the war, that won't put him over real social conservatives that share the sentiments of most Republicans, who also strongly supports the war. Good grief, Giuliani lovers make it sound like Giuliani is the only guy in the GOP that supports the war!!! That's crazy!!!
EXACTLY!!! And neither of them a RINO, like Giuliani. Where was Giuliani when the conservative movement took hold and brought the GOP back to majority status after 50 years of secularist Rockefellar RINO minority rule? Conservatives created this majority, NOT a RINO, and conservatives will continue to lead it. Period.
Why don't we march against the New York Times?
Why don't we march against the Federal Courts?
Totally. RINO = Giuliani. No RINO has won GOP appeal nationally. Not ever. Not even close. Giuliani's pro-war media darling status won't change that. He's no more supportive of the war than the real conservatives who also support the war strongly. The only reason this is even an issue is because the media is so desperate for a RINO to take over the party and stop the conservative movement from finishing off the Democrat party as a contender. The quickest way to get the DNC back in power will be to elect a RINO President.
If that's the most effective way, OK..I think the most effective way is to stop buying or advertising in their newspaper and to keep the Majority so our Judges get confirmed.
Italian doesn't matter. But New Yorker and RINO does. That will never win nationally in the GOP.
No, it's not.
The bottom line point I have said a hundred times today is this. The conservative movement created this majority. That movement was lead by conservative social Republicans. Giuliani is a RINO. Giuliani does not agree with half the GOP plank. It wasn't RINOs that created this majority, it was REAL solid conservatives. That's the bottom line. Giuliani is the GOP type that made the GOP a minority party for 50 years with secular non-values ideals. It was social conservative Reagan that birthed the conservative movement, taking the GOP back to it's 1850's roots through Abe Lincolns terms, until the 1930s, when the secular Republicans took over. So basically, the last time the RINOs took over the party, the GOP was a minority for 50 yars. Do ya really want to do that again? I don't.
I believe that George Soros or those of his ilk
are financially sustaining liberal media. Don't the
Saudi's own Fox News? Come on. We're sold out,
taken without a shot. The old plays can't work if the
constitution and the will of the people is ignored
And I'm not talking about majority rule.
Again, so because he is a great speaker, he should be President huh? WOO HOO GO SLICK RUDY!!! Whatever. NAme me one RINO that's ever gotten national appeal since 92? Or even since Reagan in 1980, when Democrats were still the majority. Just one. If you think a RINO like Giuliani represents most Republicans, then you don't get the Republican party. The New York Republican party is NOT the national Republican party, and the national GOP plank speaks for itself. Go read it sometime. It says what it does because of most Republican voters. Period. THAT is the "poll" I stand by. RINOs do not reflect GOP values. The last time they did, the GOP was a generational minority.
Right now Allen is my choice.. I think that this Maca issue is a mountain of a molehill..
Now THAT would be a good follow on that would support the values of the conservative movement that is the GOP majority. I'm still holding out hope that Cheney will decide next fall that he's feeling pretty spunky and decides to run. He's walk away with the nomination without breaking a sweat. Two term VP, former defense secretary, knows the war first hand from being involved for eight years, and strong social and fiscal conservative. All the liberal frothing hate would drive away moderate voters from the Democrat candidate in droves. That would be gunny. :) If that happens, Newt, or Allen for VP. That would be awesome. :) Giuliani, former Mayor RINO, vs. Cheney, major hawk and conservative, two term VP who's been overseeing the war not just talking about it like Giuliani. Cheney would destroy him.
Here here. Newt understands the war better than Giuliani no matter how often the liberal media plugs Giuliani. They're plugging him because they like him, and if the liberal media likes Giuliani so much, Republicans should take that for what it's worth and not vote for him. In the past 50 years, who has the media ever liked that was good for America? I can't think of anyone.
Nonsense you're thinking the same things I am. We're on the same page. And the GOP will speak in a couple years, and they will pick a real conservative. Be it Allen, or Newt, or Tancredo, or someone who hasn't been considered yet, a conservative will be picked, not a RINO. If a RINO had a chance, then the RINOs in the Senate would be talked about like they were great by the Republican majority of voters, and they're not. RINOs are despised. Just because Giuliani did his job on 9-11 doesn't qualify him to be President. It's insane.
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.