Posted on 11/10/2006 4:29:40 AM PST by Molly Pitcher
The idea that voting for a conservative democrat equates to a change is clear proof that our education system has failed.
Congress runs on seniority, nothing more, nothing less. You get to a leadership position based on the number of years you have been in that particular body.
They newly elected conservative democrats will be seen sitting at the very end of their committees and on the last row in each chamber. Why? Because they are the newest members and those with the absolute least power.
The long term liberals from both coasts are now in the driver seat and they realize that they have between 2 and 6 years to achieve all of their goals - to put their “mark” on this nation. The lower limit is 2 years since that is the next election for members of the house, the upper limit is 6 years because that is the first time the newly elected conservative democratic senators come up for re-election.
This point was made by another Freeper in another posting this morning.
The difference between the 1975 betrayal of America's warriors and the 2006 betrayal is that Charlie didn't want to follow us home and kill more of us.
These "conservatives" were actively working to defeat America's warriors. I want them to get the full benefit of their doing so. That's not extreme; it's just.
every revolution nees a SOLUTION.
The only solution that the democrat party put forward is to promise to pose like conservatives but act like democrats.
We will see how much of a DINO is in the DINOs when the AMNESTY bill is put forward.
2006 was more 1996 again.
They need a General Newt for the 2008 campaign.
The difference between the 1975 betrayal of America's warriors and the 2006 betrayal is that Charlie didn't want to follow us home and kill more of us.Your first paragraph is 100% correct.These "conservatives" were actively working to defeat America's warriors. I want them to get the full benefit of their doing so. That's not extreme; it's just.
And it's true that many people in America, both dhimmicrats and "Republicans" are useful idiots for the Jihad.
But in the case of those you label "conservative", I think perhaps that they erred tactically, not stategically. Unlike RINOs and RATs, those conservatives who lost sight of the big electoral picture and concentrated on in-house bickering, were not "actively working to defeat America's warriors".
I know the effect is the same, but the intention is different. Does that difference not matter to you?
And aren't you unduly contributing to in-house bickering yourself, by publicly wishing radiation death for people who are, essentially, on the same side as us?
That's what I mean by "extreme".
Santorum still had people sore about Toomey from Specter's Primary in the last midterm....plus, he was getting a little to cozy with Hillary every now and then, that his conservative base told him to go take a hike.
Santorum still had people sore about Toomey from Specter's Primary in the last midterm....plus, he was getting a little to cozy with Hillary every now and then, that his conservative base told him to go take a hike.Thanks. I didn't know. You and others are providing good answers to my question. I'm glad I asked it. Long live FR!
Cal almost gets it .. but he's not there yet
We need to fact the fact .. besides the pubbies and their problems
The Dems out smarted us and they played us
I know the effect is the same, but the intention is different. Does that difference not matter to you?
No, it doesn't--because they knew the price tag for that brand of a$$-hatting going in.
And aren't you unduly contributing to in-house bickering yourself, by publicly wishing radiation death for people who are, essentially, on the same side as us?
They're either with our warriors, or they are against them. There is no other option. I wish death upon the enemies of America. Unfortunately, that category now includes about 31,000,000 folks who voted Tuesday.
I wish death upon the enemies of America. Unfortunately, that category now includes about 31,000,000 folks who voted Tuesday.And that, my friend, is pretty much the definition of extremism. In a nutshell.
You've got some good facts you're working with, but your conclusions are unsound.
Being from PA, I think the whole school internet thing turned people off too especially in Western PA. I just heard alot of complaints about that while visiting my grandparents hometown. Fair or not people did not like Pennsylvania giving him a "check" so his kids could go to school in Virginia regardless of whether he paid taxes or not.
He's far right for a blue state...and all of his elections were close calls. By running a pro-life son of a famous PA name, the Dems were able to knock him out. A big part of this elections was great candidate selections by the Dems. They handpicked candidates that could neutralize strong conservative positions in districts/states to bring some of the middle and middle left back over to their side.
The Dems learned how to play the PR game
They knew to stick together even though most of their candidates were running as conservatives
Have ya noticed how the NOW hags and NARL knew to shut their traps during the election process while the likes of Casey, jr went around claiming he was pro-life
Notice how we didn't hear the women in Hollywood screaming at rallies about how Bob Casey was going to rape women if he was elected
The Dems also knew to keep their traps shuts
They won this election for many reasons One of them being the fact they sat back and let our side do the complaining and ripping apart the Republicans for them
Don't get me wrong .. I'm not saying we should back off and go easy on the pubbies
But we sure as heck need to look outside the box to see how we lost this election
Very true, and the key to the whole election. This is no longer a country capable of fighting The Long War. Bush and Rumsfeld never understood that.
I dont see any mystery here.
A large percentage of Republicans were depressed over the Iraq war, and subconsciously want to see it end.
Rick was one of the biggest supporters of the war. As am I.
We just have to face the fact that not all conservatives think Iraq is worth the price in blood.
I apologize if you've read this in my other posts, but I spoke to many people at the polls on Tuesday (as a volunteer) and quickly realized that Republicans were reluctant, practically embarassed to argue in favor of having hundreds and thousands of American men and women killed, with no end in sight.
In retrospect, I believe Bush should have set a target end date, and been more forceful about it.
Say.... 2007.
Firstly, if the terrorists insurgents opted to wait...GREAT. The violence would subside.
If things changed, Bush always could push BACK the date when the time comes.
But at least it would have given Republicans, myself also, some hope that this will not be a never ending support of a Muslim civil war.
Santorum was too liberal for a state that keeps electing Arlen Specter?
Dude, whatever you're smoking, pass it around.
Many may have been Evangelicals .. but I don't think they were republicans .. more like 3rd party
I hate to be repetative, but as long as the bulk of the sheepsh%t media continue to promote the claim that the Democratic party is "for" women, then easily-duped women will continue to flock to the Dems.
I wish I had a solution, but I need another cup of coffee first.
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.