Victor Davis Hanson Ping !
Let me know if you want in or out
Posted on 07/07/2005 4:29:15 AM PDT by Tolik
John Bolton's confirmation hearing for U.S. ambassador to the United Nations drags on. The upcoming Supreme Court nomination, the future of Social Security and Iraq prompt knee-jerk hysteria from the Democrats in lieu of a concrete counter-agenda about running the country.
Then, of course, there's the Democratic Party chairman, Howard Dean, who can't stop ranting. Recently he averred that a lot of Republicans "have never made an honest living in their lives," and that the GOP is "pretty much a white Christian party."
We've seen such infantile negativism before, and it leads nowhere. The Republicans of 1964 were a red-hot bunch —out of power, hard-right and on the wrong side of civil rights. During the 12 years of the Reagan and Bush Senior administrations, Democrats were no better, resorting to demonizing Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. More recently, many Republicans descended into a mindless, obsessive hatred of Bill Clinton.
But the current Democratic furor and obstructionism are unprecedented and obviously self-defeating. How can we make sense of the Democrats' behavior?
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
Let me know if you want in or out
They might have been on the wrong side of "civil rights" but they knew a proto-facist deal when they saw one and that is what the civil rights industry has become.
Filibuster Busters (Democrat reactionaries are about to be taught a constitutional lesson. )
Posted by nickcarraway
On News/Activism 05/12/2005 3:02:54 AM EDT · 33 replies · 1,136+ views
The American Prowler ^ | 5/12/2005 | R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
WASHINGTON -- Students of American politics are about to witness a real battle royal in the Senate. The use of the filibuster is the issue. We are not talking about the filibuster as used by Southern Democrats to preserve segregation. That filibuster was the parliamentary standby resorted to by Democratic reactionaries for much of the 20th century. This filibuster is the parliamentary standby resorted to by liberal Democrats. They use it to preserve not segregation but rather judge-made law. They are the reactionaries of the 21st century. In the federal system of government, created by our Constitution, the legislature makes...
The New Status Quo (Liberals Have Become The New Reactionaries) Michael Barone Alert
Posted by goldstategop
On News/Activism 12/27/2004 12:56:14 AM EST · 17 replies · 749+ views
Townhall.com ^ | 12/27/04 | Michael Barone
Once upon a time, liberals were the folks who wanted to change society. They thought existing institutions were unjust and that individuals needed protection against the workings of the market. They looked forward to a society that would be different. To a considerable extent, 20th century liberals achieved many of their goals. Racial segregation was abolished. An economic safety net was constructed. Government issued regulations were set up to protect the environment. Few Americans want to undo these changes. But they may want others. Looking back on election year 2004, I am struck by how many of the constituencies supporting...
Ending the Reactionaries' Reign of Terror (Which past – March 2003 or a theo-fascist 12th century?)
Posted by quidnunc
On News/Activism 11/10/2004 4:38:13 PM EST · 1 reply · 223+ views
StrastegyPage ^ | November 10, 2004 | Austin Bay [Creators Syndicate]
Amsterdam helps explain the stakes in Fallujah — the Amsterdam of Nov. 2, 2004, where an Islamist radical murdered Dutch libertarian filmmaker Theo van Gogh. Fallujah is Iraq's murder capital — or more precisely, the outlaw town used as a staging area for murder committed by Iraq's secular and religious reactionaries. And "reactionary" is a much more apt description for these thugs than "insurgent." Words matter, and insistently describing the murderers in Iraq as insurgents distorts the aims and true nature of these enemies. Saddam's old cronies (the secular reactionaries) and Musab al-Zarqawi's suicide bombers (the religious reactionaries) don't hold...
The real reactionaries
Posted by pookie18
On News/Activism 11/10/2004 9:21:37 AM EST · 3 replies · 331+ views
Jewish World Review ^ | 11/10/04 | Jack Kelly"Vote for us, you greedy warmongering bigots, because we're smarter than you are." I doubt this approach will win over the affections of the nearly 60 million Americans who voted to re-elect President Bush, but it is the tack many Democrats and their friends in the news media have taken. For years, they attacked the intelligence and character of President Bush. Now they are attacking the intelligence and character of those who voted for him. "America has always had strains of isolationism, nativism, chauvinism, puritanism and religious fanaticism," wrote Maureen Dowd in the New York Times. "Democrats are not going...
If a strict constructionist justice is not nominated to replace O'Connor, then I will agree with Howard Dean that Republican politician(s) "have not made on honest living in their lives."
If some kind of moderate, or "moderate in sheep's clothing" gets appointed, then one has to ask oneself, "Why support this at all?"
People are literally dying in London and here you are STILL CARPING about this?
What the HELL is wrong with you?
Leave the party; we don't care.
Here ya go:
Just when I was starting to forget that VDH is a registered Democrat...
;O)
Dont forget this post, dated earlier!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1209423/posts
A lot of the country agrees with that, T!
Yes, I remember reading it. Very good post. Thanks.
Talk about setting the bar low! Like of like saying Albert Speer wasn't as bad as Hermann Göring, or Trotsky was better than Stalin.
People are literally dying in London and here you are STILL CARPING about this?
What the HELL is wrong with you?
Leave the party; we don't care.
The last count I saw was 2 dead. Unfortunate especially for their families but atleast that many died here in the US driving to work this morning. It would take thousands of attack like this morning to bring down the US but only one or two bad SC justices could do it.
People die senselessly every day Howlin.
"mindless, obsessive hatred of Bill Clinton."
I don't think my hatrred was mindless, the stakes were huge and well worth the hate.
Although I enjoy VDH and often learn something from his columns, he has a habit of starting out with a theme and sort of bending historical details to fit it. In this case, the above statement is an example. The GOP was not "hard right", unless you consider a party dominated by Eisenhower and Rockefellar types "hard right". Goldwater, bless him, was a fluke, the kind of fluke that would not be repeated by the GOP until Reagan came around
As far as being on "the wrong side" of civil rights - Republicans were far more likely to support civil rights legislation in DC than Democrats (it was southern Democrats that had killed two previous civil rights bills). Goldwater supported two earlier national civil rights bils - he opposed the 1964 CRA since he felt, correctly, that it would be a vehicle for the Federal Govt to unconstitutionally userp power from the states.
You people are sick.
And here I am thinking this thread was about Republican & Democratic party issues and intrigue.
Silly me not to recognize that this thread that speaks of judicial appointments, Bolton nomination, and such is actually about London.
Silly me not to realize that the O'Connor retirement is no longer an issue, and that we are capable of dealing with only one thing at a time.
Why did you ping me to this thread?
Because of your political insight, which is normally outstanding and definitely worth being heard.
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.