That is such garbage. The reality is the RNC candidates ran away from GWB in 2006 and they lost. They were suckered into the MSM BS of "don't run with the President" and they didn't...and they lost.
In 2000, GWB won. In 2002, the RNC ran completely behind him (bringing him into every state with close races)...we won back the Senate and expanded in the House. In 2004, he won reelection with the most votes in history (the party ran behind him again...and picked up seats in both chambers).
In 2006 the RNC foolishly ran away from the President and they lost!...
It is the RNC not standing up firm and tall behind this President on the WOT/Iraq that have cost them big time. On issue after issue the RNC has cried and whined that the WH isn't doing enough. The RNC hasn't once taken the fight to the DEMs....constantly expecting the WH to do it all themselves (taking on the DEMs, MSM, 527s, etc, etc).
No, the RNC not standing up behind this CINC is what cost them in 2006. That and allowing a few differences on domestic issues to give an edge to DEMs.
GWB is a hell of a good man. An incredible CINC and a guy at times that only wants to see the best in other people and not think the worst (which costs him at times).
GWB destroying the GOP? Not by a long shot. If only any others in the GOP had the backbone and resolve of this man it would be a much better party.
Bush has not mobilized the country for war, this has become a war that the people can watch on CNN but not really be involved in. American's are not tired of the bloodshed. Just the opposite. We're bored with nothing happening. American love a winner and will not tollorate a looser. Bush has allowed this war to be precieved as a looser. How disappointed are you when your team looses the game. What do the owners do, they fire the coach or the manager. Get some new players. Come up with a new stratige for the next game. We are watching a sports contest, or a made for TV movie.
Bush needs to get the people involved and on a war footing, but the time may have passed for that, at least untill the next homefront attack.
I think the Islamofachist have learnd a lesson, and the undercurrents suggest that the new front for the enemy is europe, because we really don't care if europe falls to the enemy, because we really don't like them very much.
I'm with you, DevSix.
There are certianly a number of things he has done that I disagree with, but he has been so good on so many fronts. The only area that they have been an absolute failure on is PR since 2005. It started with accepting blame for Katrina and has been a disastrous downhill slide ever since. I just don't get it. I do blame the congress and the party for deserting him, but the WH has done literally nothing to tell the rest of us view other than the one we hear in the media. Apologizing for everything under the sun is not leadership.
"No, the RNC not standing up behind this CINC is what cost them in 2006. That and allowing a few differences on domestic issues to give an edge to DEMs."
Sorry, but the president is the leader of the RNC, he chooses the person to represent his interests. Obviously he chose the wrong person. Now he has made it worse by choosing Mel Martinez to head the RNC, hoping that will help him get his amnesty through. Bsh has destroyed the GOP.
"GWB destroying the GOP? Not by a long shot. If only any others in the GOP had the backbone and resolve of this man it would be a much better party."
Oh, do you mean his resolve to open the floodgates to millions more illegals? Or maybe his resolve to put more Border Patrol Agents in jail for doing their jobs, then refusing to pardon them. Or maybe his resolve to spend money like a drunken sailor on huge social programs? Or maybe his resolve to sell out to Mexico and the big businesses who demand an inexhaustible supply of cheap labor?
No, the man is a loser and is totally out of touch with conservatives. I wouldn't complain if the Dems impeached him, even if it were for the wrong reasons. Good riddance!
Bush has done a great job on taxes and judicial appointments.
Actually, I differ from most conservatives on his Iraq policy and immigration stand. I believe we are WAY on the wrong side of the picture with our incessant twiddling with Iraq and our desperate hope that if we stay there long enough playing "whackamole," we will get a gov't that is stable, peaceful, and friendly to the US. This will doubtless get me the normal mindless braying about "deserting the troops" and "closet DU" and other such stupidity, but the fact is that our policy is incoherent, feckless, and being made up as we go along. We have no idea what "victory" would look like if we had it, and we are asking our troops to "win" something without giving them clear defineable goals. Each time we give them something to do, they do it, and then we decide that this wasn't enough, so we give them something else to do. We cannot achieve our true objective which is to have a Jeffersonian Democracy with a crapload of oil which is friendly to the USA and resistant to Islamic radicalism. We won't come out and say so, because no one has a forking clue how to define a strategy to achieve such an objective. That IS the objective, though, and it is unreasonable, unobtainable, and won't work with the present population in Iraq and our reluctance to commit enough troops even to gain control of the borders, much less re-educate an entire population. Therefore, we continually wave the flag and lugubriate about "fighting terrorism abroad" and other such stuff. This is, simply, a red herring, and emotional manipulation from a gov't I have ceased to trust. We are trying to do this "on the cheap" and that is because of blatant political reasons. Unfortunately, the time has passed when the admin could ask the country to sacrifice and they would step up and do so. Like so many other things about Iraq, the admin has squandered the ability to..., for example, cut spending by 5% "across the board" in order to pay for a ramped up war effort. Instead, they have tried to borrow and have run into the limits imposed by exploding domestic fiscal spending (worse than the democrats!). So, we try to do it cheaply, to avoid driving up the borrowing and pray fervently that we don't have a hiccup in the economy.
When someone brings this stuff up, you get the normal chorus of caterwauling imbeciles who really have nothing to say, but think that invective, abuse and vitriol are somehow arguments for the administration. The REAL pathetic ones are the blue hairs who will just plain lie in their accusations about the political stand of anyone who challenges the war. Accusations of "coward" "betrayer of troops" "islamofascist apologist" and "anti military" are bits of the usual canard of this mindless troupe of performing monkeys. However, they have no real defense of our policy (or lack thereof) and just propose more of the same, in the empty hope that somehow kids with American Flags on their shoulders are going to magically reverse 20 centuries or more of tribal hatreds, internicene murder, and happily killing cousin Haji because he doesn't buy into the "true" succession of prophetic teaching from the chief pedophile (Sunni vs Shi'ite).
Folks, we are in a rat's nest of hopeless cultural collapse. Figure out a way to declare victory and GET OUT. We have no business trying to nationbuild in Bosnia, and we don't have any business doing it in Iraq.