Posted on 02/21/2010 2:10:47 PM PST by TruthHound
To say the GOP and the Democrats are no different, to say the GOP needs to hit a recovery-program-type bottom and hang its head in remorse, is to delay our own country’s recovery from the problems the Democratic left is inflicting. The stakes are too important to go through that kind of exercise, which will ultimately go nowhere anyway — because it’s already happened.
The first task of a serious political analyst is to see things as they are. There is a difference between morning and night. There is a difference between drunk and sober. And there is a difference between the Republican and Democratic parties. To ignore these differences, or propagate the myth that they don’t exist, is not only discouraging, it is dangerous.
(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...
That’s right. McCain was a travesty. And what was his greatest single travesty? Well, to each his own, I guess, but in my mind it was McCain-Feingold.
And what did Bush do? Signed it. And why? Because he thought the Supremes would gut it, which they did, almost a decade later. But what does that say about Bush? What would YOU have done if you had been president. I know what I would have done, or any decent conservative.
But Bush, for all his fine points — and he had many — was not deep down a conservative. He really wasn’t.
Your conspiracy theory is as laughable as the Paulites. Soros money under the table? Seriously?
And it doesn’t matter that McCain spent the 2008 campaign campaigning against Bush. That only shows how stupid McCain was.
What matters is that Bush’s inherent RINOism set the stage for McCain.
And that’s what you can’t see.
And that’s what Beck can see.
I too am ready for an across the board conservative, but I think you'll agree that the person needs to be able to be elected, don't you? There needs to be a strong leadership potential (as Reagan and Bush both clearly had), and not just an ideological perfection.
We never get 100% of what we want, but when we get across the board conservative federal judges and SC justices, a powerful pro-life stance, an unwavering tax cutting policy, and a courageous (and lonely) stand in the war against terrorists, I'd say we came out extremely well under George W. Bush.
And I believe history will prove me right on that.
I agree with you, mulligan, and I’m going to get that article you mention.
That’s not the same video. He was giving a press conference and I thought he was talking to a female reporter (you can’t see the reporter).
CV Vet,
I hear ya!
Time to cast aside all the past “R”s who were part of this growing mess we have now.
I want a real revolution in the conservative movement, and don’t want anyone influencing of having any “leadership” position that was part of the ‘ruling establishment’ in Washington these past 20 years. Especially the last administration.
I want NEW FACES with NEW and BOLD IDEAS, who have been out front TELLING IT LIKE IT IS and that have ACTUALLY DONE SOMETHING - they have WALKED THE WALK!
PALIN, RUBIO, DEMINT. - There’s three right there.
RINO's don't pick judges like Roberts and Alito. RINO's aren't unwaveringly pro-life. RINO's aren't absolute tax cutters. RINO's don't stand against Kyoto, the World Court and the UN. RINO's don't stand alone (even against their own party) to fight and win the war against terrorists.
There's a big difference between Bush and McCain, IMO. Bush cared what was best for the country. McCain cares what's best for McCain. Bush wanted to work with Democrats. McCain wants to BE a Democrat.
I know others will disagree, but doing some things I don't agree with doesn't make a regular, sometimes conservative Republican a RINO.
And as long as Beck keeps putting his little magnet picture of Bush on the same side as traitors and Marxists, he can't 'see' anything.
I have to admit, ohioWfan, you make good points. Darn good points. The next time I watch Beck I’ll keep your points in mind.
Yes, too many in the GOP, including at least some of the leadership, were THEN part of the problem and deserve blame. However there were some people in Congress, outnumbered, trying to hold down spending. I don't recall many of them being on the Rat side of the aisle. For example remember the legislative history of TARP, McCain's Hari-Kari moment. The House, behind vocal efforts by GOP conservatives, initially blocked it. Most of the RAT nays wanted something even worse. McCain and Obama next pushed it through the Senate. Then 26 more GOP arms were twisted in pushing it through the House, with still the majority of the GOP opposed
Blaming all of the THEN GOP for the actions of many of the GOP is wrong and dangerous to our cause. The GOP lost a lot of seats in '06 and '08. Many of the biggest GOP spenders were removed, so their share of the blame shouldn't still fall on those who remain. Alas their RAT replacements have been as bad or worse. Concentrate your efforts where blame remains rather than being proudly "mad as h*ll" while throwing in a bunch of new bums. We don't need screaming fools metaphorically shooting randomly on full auto; we have a target rich environment for snipers who can tell a donkey or a RINO from an elephant.
We must also consider that some of the spending binge was extortion money passed to keep the Democrats from further screwing with the war effort. That certainly doesn't excuse every budget busting GOP vote, but had the opposition party been loyal to the country some in the GOP wouldn't have sacrificed the budget for permission to defend the country. Blame the Rats for forcing those hands and blame Bush for not providing any support to fight it.
The RINOs. Starting with McLame.
Now YOU listen up.
That is only true for the last year at best. What were the Republicans doing the previous 8 years?
Why, contributing to the enormous problem directly or by acquiesence. Most of it was deemed "bipartisanship." Being girly-men and not wanting to be labeled the party of "no."
Often, "Hell NO!" is the proper answer. Better late than never.
I’ll agree with you on the Bennett comment.
I agree. To paint Bush with the RINO label is absurd. But I am somewhat sympathetic with Beck’s characterization of his economic policies as “progressive” (although Beck probably doesn’t make the distinction I do). I have heard him praise Bush regarding the War on Terror and particulary the surge.
He was very hard on Bush’s Iraq policies prior to the surge, particularly regarding Fallujah.
Damn straight, Bill.
Who gave us expanded coverage for prescription medicines? Who gave us 3 trillion dollar budgets? Who gave us expanded government involvement in education? Who gave us trillion dollar bank bailouts?
Hint: It would be the Party that is "different" from the DemocRAT Party.
Oh Beck is so smart. Yes. The parties are both bad, the Democrats are just a little worse. Let’s join the 9/12 project and buy a Beck book. Then we will support Mr. Smith. He’s the third party candidate we need to show those mean folks in Washington! The third party will be up and running in a couple of months, just in time for a landslide against both of those evil Democrats AND Republicans. They are all bad and part of the problem don’t you know.
If that’s our plan, I’m moving to Singapore.
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.