Posted on 06/01/2007 5:41:16 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
However, now I do not feel alone. Peggy Noonan has a new column up in the Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal. She has clearly said what has been getting me down. I think I knew what was up, but couldn't put a finger on it. I knew it centered around the immigration debate, and the way our congressional leaders are behaving. That sentiment especially includes Mr. Bush too, but when I read this column, I felt like Charlie Brown yelling at Lucy at her Psychology booth when he yells, "That's it!" when trying to identify why he can't get into the Christmas spirit.
Try this clip on for size :
The White House doesn't need its traditional supporters anymore, because its problems are way beyond being solved by the base. And the people in the administration don't even much like the base. Desperate straits have left them liberated, and they are acting out their disdain. Leading Democrats often think their base is slightly mad but at least their heart is in the right place. This White House thinks its base is stupid and that its heart is in the wrong place.
For almost three years, arguably longer, conservative Bush supporters have felt like sufferers of battered wife syndrome. You don't like endless gushing spending, the kind that assumes a high and unstoppable affluence will always exist, and the tax receipts will always flow in? Too bad! You don't like expanding governmental authority and power? Too bad. You think the war was wrong or is wrong? Too bad.
But on immigration it has changed from "Too bad" to "You're bad."
The president has taken to suggesting that opponents of his immigration bill are unpatriotic--they "don't want to do what's right for America." His ally Sen. Lindsey Graham has said,
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Peggy is some writer. (Sigh of admiration.)
“Leading up to WWI England did not protect their industrial base”
I’ve never seen any evidence. The reason England was not as prepared for WWI as it might have been was that it maintained a professional army while Germany had a general conscription. The early phases the war had the much smaller, but more effective, British Expeditionary Force, slowing down the German advance. In fact the British professionals - were so good at “musketry” that the million germans, attacking 100,000 British, swore they were facing machine gun fire.
But, the British army was fighting the last war, as generals have a tendency to do, while Germany had massed bodies to throw at them. The reason for the early defeats had more to do with numbers than any decline in the British industrial base, which turned out planes, tanks, ships and artillery. Note that when the French sent massed troops in the counter-attack at the Marne, the German advance was stopped cold.
RR’s pull out from Lebanon always struck me as mirroring the European attitude about Muslims...that they were an insoluble problem and couldn’t be successfully westernized/civilized. (That they were nuts.) The Europeans didn’t even try. Sobering thought, esp. as they’re flooding the EU and here we sit with open borders and Muslims plotting to blow up JFK. There was news of another, bigger plot, too. Investigation of that underway.
I don't think you've been paying attention. Fred Thompson has said on numerous occasions through numerous media outlets that the current bill is bad law and that it won't work.
Your last sentence shown above is disconnected from the rest of your comments.
“Posters who use terms like “hater” or “Bush hater” use it as a cheap and dishonest way of demonizing honest dissenters.”
You iz very wise!
Please, do not freepmail to me again. Say what you’ve got to say here.
Well said.
Misdemeanors.
First, I’ll ask for forgiveness ... That post I pinged you to included several other posters, too, and when I looked at what you had written I realized that it didn’t apply to sub-threads you had replied to. So, it’s no surprise you thought I might have been putting “words in your mouth” - you weren’t posting on anywhere near the “deport or nothing” line to begin with. I wrongly pinged you - probably was intending to ping someone else instead.
As far as the other portions of your lashing out at me, if you were to look at what I’ve written over the years, you will certainly discover that you are in serious error - but again, my mistake inspired your reaction, so it’s best to just let it go at that.
Might as well keep clintonfatigued—he might need it again after 2008.
Many of the negatives at the website are old and the dynamics have changed. I’ll listen to what Fred has to say on immigration THIS YEAR though Hunter’s my main guy.
Why did they stop the operation?
Excellent analogy to a battered spouse. President Bush brings us flowers the next day and we forgive hoping that the nightmare will go away--then we get the next beating. The violence has escalated and we've got a beating that has almost wiped us out (immigration reform). We (Repubs) are all gathered in the shelter now trying to figure out where we go and what we do next.
Twice Bush supporter here—the 2006 elections pretty much were my final blow. The immigration mess is just dragging my dead body behind a car.
“That’s misdimeanors.
Misdemeanors.”
Yep, and I’m glad someone caught it. People should always “question” and not follow blindly. Good for you!
I believe he was referring to Fred Barnes there, not Fred Thompson.
Sorry, should have pinged you, too, to that last post.
Do you always answer a question with a question?
INS funding was cut and not because of a huge cry of Americans over OW like you imagine. Congress was the problem just like always so take your claims of backlash and shove it.
You have yet to prove your point. Please explain why Eisenhower got so many EV if their was an American political backlash please. You never even answered any of my questions. At least give me that courtesy.
The only backlash was from the Mexican side because they were pissed because those Mexican that came back were creating problems for them. Of course Congress relaxed the laws, cut the funding and created a bigger problem. Point is there was no backlash just politics as usual.
Because the democrat running against him was too weak.
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.