Posted on 11/14/2007 2:13:23 AM PST by Aristotelian
I wonder some times if the old man ever really figured out how badly he got hosed by that evil rat George Mitchell and the DemocRAT Congress.
GWB should have learned a couple of things from this.
1. Kick SH’s ass.
2. Don’t trust any RAT. Any of them. Ever.
Unfortunately he learned #1 OK but really didn’t learn #2 very well.
Am I right?
;-/
Which just goes to show not all kooks are on the left.
Let's see now. 1976 I voted for Ford. 1980 & 1984 I voted Reagan. 1988 I voted for Poppy Ford Bush. 1996 I voted for Dole very reluctantly because of the 1996 convention platform being too LIBERAL but I bet you forgot all about that freak show huh? 2000 I vote Keyes in the primary and Phillips in the general.
Phillips BTW is co-founder of the Conservative grassroots org called The Moral Majority. 2004 I voted Constitution Party. This time I'm leaning toward Ron Paul but could vote for Tancredo or even Hunter. The rest of the GOP choices? NO! So how bout you Rudy Bot ready to tongue Wudy Wed Dwess real good? I'll support a good conservative choice if and when the GOP decides to ever back one. But Viagra Bob was the last time I voted Republican for the sake of the RINO's. But how about yourself? Did you vote for the man in 2000 who said that he and Mr Gore were not that far apart on most issues. If you did then well? That makes you far more liberal than I.
I invite you to go back through my history and prove me a liberal. My join year was 1999. Check my bookmarks also. Nothing liberal there. Better yet I have never been a Bush fan. Here ya go.
To: The_Eaglet
I can't vote for Bush because of the same reasons I couldn't two months ago. The more he speaks the more clear to me my decision was right. He will continue this nation on it's present course maybe not as fast but in the same general direction.
103 Posted on 07/21/2000 15:31:20 PDT by cva66snipe
That's true. The GOP has Arnoid Kennedy the beloved Republican governor, Hatch, Lott, Specter, Snowe, Collins, and a whole bunch of hand picked RINO's Bush himself picked out now sitting in the senate and house. AS THE MINORITY. Republican Liberalism does not win elections it only enables Liberal Democrats. The DEMs never had a better Democrat in the White House than George Walker Bush.
If you mean the course set by Ford, Poppy, and Clinton that he has done he has stayed the course. The course of Reagan? No! Not even close. The Bush's were by no means followers of Ronald Reagan. Quite the opposite. Abandoning Reagan's course cost Poppy a second term.
Clinton ran to the right of him and won. Clinton ran right of Bob Dole and despite all the scandals won. Who won the land slides and what was the platform? Reagan won two on Conservatism. The GOP won two houses on Conservatism. The GOP lost what should have been a shoe in White House race because Bob Dole just had to let Chrissie and Suzie run the party platform. People stayed home in disgust. Bush ran at best moderate and nearly lost to Gore. Any other DEM would have won big over Bush because he did not run Conservative. Remember the party nearly split in half in 2000 because of his first choice for VP not that his second was any better he isn't.
If the GOP is to ever see a majority in either house again it will not come from running moderates but rather conservatives. The moderates take over of the party in early 1996 has been a disaster. It made them ineffective against Clinton;. There was a major power play within the party and conservatives were outed from say in the platform. The results the nation saw November 1996. The GOP has been spineless ever since and that cost them two majorities.
Smarter money? So basically you would have nuked or razed Baghdad and much of the rest of Iraq? You're reply is semi-incoherent.
You don't rememeber? I sure do. I was a Democrat at the time, and I remember one friend hoping Reagan would die after he was shot. And Reagan was only a month or so into his first term. I remember vicious hatred extended towards Reagan. As I said in my first post the Bush hatred seems to be a little worse, but not by much.
My guess is that many libs thought that conservatism had disappeared with the end of Reagan's terms. They were shock and horrified to find that his ideas had not totally gone away. And even a Bush backer like myself will admit that Bush is not a conservative warrior like Reagan was. But if he was a liberal as some people on this forum suggest, why do so many liberals despise him? They should try to answer that question first before they call Bush a liberal.
If we just had to go to war with Iraq then in a conventional manner it should have been an all out offensive to level the place and leave it in smoldering ruins for the world to see. That is war and the purpose of war. Forget the kinder gentler war nonsense. Forget the Geneva Convention. Eliminate the enemy in a manner as quickly and as safely for our own troops as possible and be done with it. Then get out. Time frame? Less than one year. No rebuilding!
Second option and more practical? Using the venues given in the Constitution to go directly after the actual terrorist leadership via Letters of Marque and Reprisal by taking the leadership out by what ever means necessary meaning killing them by what ever means possible. Something Jerry Ford prohibited doing as did Jimmy Carter.
Our ROE's in Iraq is the same nonsense used against our troops in Nam. Same results. Court Martials for U.S. Soldiers while Bush pretends nothing is wrong? Gee I wonder why? Nam era recycled policy makers maybe? A Sec of Def who helped create the Hollow Carter Military leading the way perhaps? Yes the military was hollow under Carter. It was also was a wreck under Ford and was that way when Peanuts took over as POTUS but good Republicans don't mention that small detail do they?
Peanuts as CIC was a disaster military wise except for his second Sec of Navy whom IMO was brilliant and the man for the job who made a needed difference. A man who began the actual rebuilding process of our Navy. I saw the mess Ford /Rummy left and I saw a Navy on the mend from what it was when I joined under Ford and left the final days of Carter. Rummy was not a good Sec of Defense his first time under Ford and why Bush insisted on his second tenure at the job defies logic.
Let's talk some more about the WOT. Now one would think that if our nation goes to war that surely POTUS would ask congress to make provision. Provision meaning needed troops and equipment. Well he didn't. Bush was comfy with Slick Willies 1996 End Troop Strength numbers and as such they have remained the same +- a few thousand. Like I said I am very glad a Bush was not POTUS in WW2.
Some get mad I reckon because I hold both parties accountable for the mess they have made. The DEMs I knew would do it. I expected a higher standard from the GOP but it has become the Other Liberal Political Party.
The US made a huge mistake with it's Iraq policy. Worse is mistakes do not fix mistakes. Bush in late 2000 told this nation he was against nation building. But he also told us he and Mr Gore were not that far apart on issues.
In the mean time we have China's Sock Puppet tyrant much closer to home who could in a matter of months consolidate his powers in such places as Cuba and Central America nations. A much bigger threat and actually in our back yard.
I would like to see a Republican POTUS take us back up to at least 425 ships with a strong focus on submarines and two more carriers as well. 425 would be a gain of about 100 ships still far below Reagan's 594 ship Navy. Today we are in the very low 300's. Thanks to Poppy and Clinton as well as the DEM and GOP congress our Navy was literally cut in half. I would like to see a two carrier 24/7/365 policy be the rule once again in the MED SEA and stop using the ditch especially with carriers. I would like to see the Naval base in UAE closed as far as repairs go. My bet is this is where the COLE bombers learned just where to hit the COLE. I would like to see a second carrier producing shipyard opened preferably west coast. We once had four and used two now we have one. If it gets destroyed then what?
I want to see the USA once again be able to produce domestically all it's military needs including Marine One and all the way down to Private Joe's socks.
Terry Reed in “Compromised” predicted this, at a time when I hadn’t even heard of GW or Jeb.
Harriet Miers was only one. Explain the other?
Truth be told, politics is a grand show put on for the idiot masses. Nobody who is outside of one of the 2 major parties will ever have any meaningful effect on the country's direction, and both the Rep's and the Dem's are two peas in a pod but for the grand show.
Bush's one redeeming quality is his dogged pursuit of Islamic fanatics, and his insistence on putting their eradication ahead of even his own short-term political image. He will save the world from a tyrant worse than Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot combined, even if he has to drag the world kicking and screaming to its own salvation.
Now THAT'S a leader.
;-/
Forget trying to build a democracy in Iraq. It's never worked there and never will. We're building the next playground for the next Saddam the radical clerics {the untouchables so it seems} will put in power. Even Reagan had to finally see the cause and effects of our M.E. policy. I'm not saying run I'm saying we are making a huge mistake trying to civilize Islamic nations. Their hate and jealousy is as old as Ishmael.
I also think we went about going after Bin Ladden wrong. We should have played stupid if we knew he was behind the 9/11 attacks. Let him get comfy and then BOOM. Right now were pretty much doing with him what the Soviet Union did.
Ever try to catch a horned goat? You can't especially in their own domain. You will die of a heart attack chasing them and they will not even break a sweat. Ignore them or even entice them to your domain or your trap and you have them. You can rattle their favorite treat and they will literally break their fool necks coming to you and knock the rest of the herd out of the way doing so.
In the mid 1970's even before Carter a wrong message was sent out to the Islamic nations. We've been paying for it ever since. That message was we will not use covert ops or take out foreign heads of state even in our own national interest. The Constitution however has provisions for allowing us doing just that. State sponsored terrorism exploded within a few years afterward. Unfortunately it was a RINO POTUS who sent the message. In that respect operations against such as these need to be taken out of the hands of the Justice Department and State Department and placed solely with the Department of Defense. This is the one department best equipped and trained to analyze intelligence and act on it with orders of POTUS and limited congressional notification on a need to know basis to satisfy Constitutional restraint to issue of Letters or Marque and/or reprisals.
Personally I think we should {minus Israel} let the Middle East Islamic nations go back to doing what they do best which is killing each other off. They seemed to accomplish that much without our help. It may sound cruel but if they really want change and democracy well then let their own blood buy it. That way they will understand the cost. I also think if we had kept our nose out of Israels internal and foreign affairs many of the problems we face today would not exist. It was Israel who first ended Saddams WMD program. We are in grave danger of being enablers to Israels enemies with our foreign policy. That much Bush and Clinton as well as Mad Maddy and Condi are two peas in a pod.
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.