Posted on 07/13/2007 9:51:52 AM PDT by PolishProud
Agreed.
Bush has not been the same President in his 2nd term. And, he’s proving to be the wimp that his Father was when he kow-tow’d to the leftist idiots too.
Working with Ted Kennedy on the “let’s grow the democrap voter base” (amnesty) bill...is he serious?
I mean, working with that lout on the Education bill was stomach-churning enough, but, given the improvements that Bush made in Texas, I was grudgingly supportive.
And, considering that Peggy Noonan, while sometimes swayed by sentiment and emotion, was (after all) a key figure in Ronald Reagan’s administration. She knows and understands Presidential politics very well.
And, she’s right. Bush has failed politically and publicly in overwhelming ways. He and the administration don’t seem to be able to harness the power of the “bully pulpit” the way that Ronald Reagan was. Now, you may say “media bias, media bias”, but Reagan had the same media bias to deal with.
There were a lot of people who endured an awful lot to get Bush elected again. As have I recounted on several threads, I was spat on (twice) on election day in 2004 while campaigning. So, I don’t need to be lectured about dedication.
But, turning on your own party, on the very people who helped get you elected and calling them racists because of a policy disagreement? Well, George, you get what you deserve.
Abandon the base. Really politically savvy. [mattdono shakes head]
LI is like a gal pal. Funny, intelegent, and she gets it.
Mr. “I’ve got a secret but I’m bit tell’n” Chertoff looks uglier than that Clinton snake James Car-evil.
Now that is ugly!
Inghraham...despite some talk show hosts' spoken intentions to be honest, it's really about ratings. It's controversy that sells so they keep the fighting going. Ingraham keeps her audience by bashing the President. Ratings is what's most important to her.
She lost her fiance when she had a cancer diagnosis. Then she lost her major show sidekick, Habib, for whatever reason, and then she just went shrill over the Dubai Ports deal and Harriet Miers. She seems to have anger as a major motivation for her show prep.
She could just as easily trade places with Randi Rhodes these days. They are on the same page. I wonder what Laura’s listenership numbers are?
Regarding post #5, Laura Ingraham is 100% on the money. I’ve lost faith in this congress and this president. It’s too bad more of the male talking heads don’t seem to have the testosterone levels that the women do, for example, I wish more of the men would speak out like Laura Ingraham, Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter. They don’t seem to have the fire. I’ve gone from being a republican to an independent conservative and I have no respect for anyone who carries water for this White House.
Fred Thompson in 08.
You may like her style, but I find it overly wordy and too flowery. It’s a matter of taste, not competence. I like my politics and news to be more cut and dry. I’m not really interested her little personal stories or analogies that she feels compelled to include in most of her articles. Her choice of adjectives often seems pretentious, but like I said, it’s a matter of taste.
Can you imagine President Bush adopting her style of speech writing? It would have been like Al Gore wearing brown suits.
Agreed. So where has this Bush been for the last 3 years?
There are several tracks to this. One is that a “shaping of the ground” is occurring prior to the onslaught of primary season. This pundits know who they are supporting in primary season, even if they haven’t said it out loud. If Newt and Thompson pull the trigger on running, the GOP debates are going to get very loud with the different sides of the party.
Also even War supporters are going to have to engage in blaming Bush for the strategery in Iraq, if not the actual decision to fight. Regardless of what the reality of Iraq is, the perception die was cast, IMO, when Bush stopped trying to shape the perception of Iraq after he beat Kerry. Its like they sighed and thought “I don’t have to worry about explaining this anymore”. Now its so far gone that only a miracle could turn it around before 08 (the perception that is).
Pundits are going to hammer Bush on the issues that bothers them (spending, immigration, war planning) in order to make those issues in the coming party war.
Laura is proving to be a disgrace...I mean we could've had kerry.
Nice parrot-job.
Right on! Bush is not conservative.
The Emperor has no clothes. From Laura Ingrahamm’s lips to our ears!
It’s NOT just like Vietnam. For one thing, Vietnam didn’t attack us. For another, as Helen Thomas foolishly blurted out yesterday, our presence in Iraq has drawn al Qaeda there to fight us. If you knew how many of them we were killing it would stagger your mind. Kill them there, kill them here, but kill them we must. We can quit, but THEY won’t.
Amen. The fact that these two are disgusted with our psuedo-"conservative" president merely confirms the feelings I've had for several years now.
The Republican party MUST select someone for 2008 who is an effective communicator.
And why should talk show hosts support the President?
They sink or swim on their own just like they should.
Very well said Leatherneck, my feelings exactly. Bush needs to grow a set of cojones and close that southern border. I’d rather spend $12 billion a month on our southern border than trying to make life better for a bunch of ungrateful, backstabbing ragheads in Iraq.
True.
Then she lost her major show sidekick, Habib, for whatever reason,
He got a much better offer with more responsibilities, elsewhere in radio...major promotion.
...and then she just went shrill over the Dubai Ports deal and Harriet Miers.
She was right on both counts.
She seems to have anger as a major motivation for her show prep.
There's plenty of cause for anger in the news.
She could just as easily trade places with Randi Rhodes these days. They are on the same page.
Mulefritters. You just lost your friggin' mind, or what?
I wonder what Laura’s listenership numbers are?
She's doing great. She and Levin each did more to stop amnesty than Limbaugh and Savage and Hannity put together.
With the Billions of our tax money the FEDS get they could get atleast One of their enumerated jobs correct! If it were a matter of really having a fraud problem at the border it might be one thing but that is not the case!! They are walking across without going through the ports of entry! And your point supports my argument! They should have the special checks on the INTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS and AT All entry points so you don’t have to check anywhere near as many!!!!!
Ravenstar
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.