Posted on 08/24/2002 7:56:02 PM PDT by sweetliberty
Wonder when the last time time was that a president actually did something independently without handlers. It is my impression that they come with the office and you can't escape them no matter how smart or qualified you might be.
------------------------------
I have your word on that?
But, beyond that, it reminds me of the observation of Winston Churchill during the rise of Hitler in which he said the nations were feeding other nations to the crocodile in the hope they would be the last one to be eaten.
------------------------------------
The problem with Bush is one of coasing through life on the basis of family contacts and reputation. It's country club social lush politics in which depth and effort are of little concern.
This is my hope. They have a stong lobby. They can make the difference.
Sycophant differs from Me-Too in that he is much more concerned with sucking up than he is with actually doing battle. Of course, he WILL engage in some light combat to impress Big Dog and other stronger Warriors, but he never exposes himself to unnecessary danger. Although combatants sometimes employ Sycophant to buttress an attack, his constantly shifting loyalties make him a weak and unreliable ally.
Too funny.
(I spelled it right didn't I?)
--------------------------
Uh, it seems to me Reagan came into office with ideas he worked on independently and stated during the early 60s without consulting polls or handlers. Of course, Reagan was a MAN, not a useless hothouse plant.
I disagree here. Although his family connections helped a great deal, they are not defining him.
That's my feeling. Although I agree that political dynasty's can and do promote poor leaders from time to time.
"The National Republican Congressional Committee has been advising its candidates NOT to mention border security and immigration issues in their speeches or campaign literature," stated Janine Hansen Independent American candidate for Congress Dist. 2 in Nevada."
Well now, in our eagerness to dump on the Republicans, we accept whatever claims an opposing candidate makes, unsubstantiated or not, without even raising the question of a verifyiable source. After all, who cares if that's the truth or not, as long as we can criticize the Republicans.
Next thing you know, people will be posting Carville's crap and calling it "the truth".
Nice chatting with ya'all!
There was a great thread posted this weekend that has the link to the site called Flame Warriors. I got a lot of giggles out of it.
------------------------------
You are getting close. Bush is not defined. Depth and definition have not been a requitement by his background and the type of life he has lived where he has been presented with effortless opportunity on the basis of being George Bush. It shows.
--------------------------
Carville's ravings arte not the truth and will never be presented by me or other like me as being the ravings of a semi-madman for hire. What Carville has had going for him is that the Republicans, including Bush, have never decisively refuted him on the national stage.
I used the original title, and you are right that it does give the impression that there is a statement made by Congressional Republicans. As to the statement itself, I do not necessarily believe or disbelieve based solely on this story, although I am inclined to believe it based on what seems to be a blatant disregard for the will of the people on the part of Republicans OR Democrats when it comes to this issue, so why would I NOT be so inclined? If you have evidence to prove me wrong, please share it. I am always willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I don't claim to have all the answers.
----------------------------
Several years ago you may remember Carville on endless national forums regarding the Clinton rapes and Lewinsky affair saying, "It's about sex. Everyone lies about sex."
The proper reply should have been, it's about the mental instability of a borderline psychotic who can not be trusted to be left aloner in the presidential office with a stupid glorified high school gir. There wasn't enough with or incisiveness in the entire Republican party to do it. That lack of wit and incisiveness was Carville's only strenth. It is what kept the Clintons in the White House, and what gives the Clintons power today. That lack of wit, lack of reflexive discernment, lack of incisiveness, is what characterizes Bush. Get it?
I would willingly trade some of our lazy citizens for some hard working immigrants.
I would gladly trade all of our open border loonies, all of our apologists for illegal immigration, and all of our immigrant-worshippers, for absolutely nothing at all in exchange. Getting rid of these nation-wreckers would be a boon surpassing anything anyone could give in exchange.
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.