Posted on 05/09/2007 5:55:32 PM PDT by kellynla
Posted on the Capital News site on C-SPAN:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/09/iraq-meeting/
NBC: 11 Republicans Berate Bush Over Iraq In Private White House Meeting
Are you illiterate?
I was defending pollster Scott Rasmussen.
I pointed out that Rasmussen was accurate in 2006 regarding all seats. He predicted GOP defeat.
My problem with prior moron is his assertion that Rasmussen’s 40% approval for Bush is not as accurate as the 28% from pro-terrorist Newsweek.
Furthermore, if you do not support victory in the war in Iraq, you support terrorists and you hate the troops.
You can hide under polls conducted by anti-American polling firms.
You are what you are.
Frikkin’ losers. Blood will be on their hands.
I was having trouble following you too.
Chill.
Buddy, it's all going to be moot if the Democrats win the White House and massive majorities in Congress. And that's where we're headed if American troops continue to be target-practice fodder in Iraq. Sorry, but them's the facts. I issued a similar warning on FR before the last election - and the response was that the polls were lying. Same ostrich response now.
Who leaked? Or is this a figment of the mediaWHORES imagination?? I bet the latter!!
More important they be reelected than we win the war. Gee if any of these a$$holes lose they have to get real jobs if they hadn’t been there long enough to become millionaires. We need term limits. Let these a$$holes become productive members of society instead of living off the taxpayers. I’m tired of their lack of support for the most important issue of our time. Stick their finger in the air. I’m also real tired of blaming Bush when no one could stand up and be heard when one has the media, the money of Soros and the traitorous actions of dims and some in the CIA and your own party hiding under there desks. How does he overcome these obstacles?
Right, they’re making it up.
Come on.
Speech after speech, the President has made the point.
At some point the people of this country have to take responsibility for not sucking so bad in their point-of-view on Iraq.
As has every other talking head, columnist and reporter in the entire industry. It's called a self-fulfilling prophesy. They've been working at since March 19, 2003. Tirelessly.
And if there's any merit to your Korea analogy, then we might as well call it a day in this country. We're incapable of fighting any sustained conflict. Troop levels in Korea were three times what they are in Iraq and Afghanistan. KIAs were ten times what they are now. Aside from the 1% of the population that is directly involved in the fighting of this war or close to someone who is, the American voter is sacrificing nothing. He's getting fat, dumb and drunk on the backs of the American soldiers who have kept the jihadists pre-occupied on their own turf for going on 6 years now. Instead of bitching and whining, maybe the American voter should just say thank you.
You're wrong. Rasmussen doesn't even make calls on House seats, first of all, so he can't call every seat correct.
Cardin won by 10, not by 5.
Talent lost by 3 and didn't win by 1.
Menendez won by 8, not by 5.
Casey won by 18, not 13.
I didn't bother looking at the gubernatorial races.
Hey, if he's going to do that, he might as well march the troops to Washington and declare himself Maximum Leader!
S'matter with you?!
“This is why the President’s inability to articulate his case is so critical. This administration sucks more at PR than any administration in recent memory.”
-
-
Somehow, our “sucky” president managed to transform the political landscape in Texas — 1st Republican elected governor; first politician of any stripe re-elected for a successive term; state legislature transformed from majority Democrat to majority Republican!
This same “sucky” president managed to win the election for President in 2000 and re-election in 2004 with more votes than any other president in history and a majority of votes for the first time since 1988 — the supposed consummate politician, ‘Mr Articulate himself’ Bill Clinton failed to get ‘majority’ support for either of his elections!!
Most importantly, our “sucky” president put this country on OFFENSE against the terrorists for the first time in generations and in the process “freed” 50 million people, a feat which will eventually TRANSFORM for the better both the Middle East and the world. And, oh by the way, he also managed to save our economy and keep us safe for 6+ years.
[FYI: THE PRESIDENT IS PERSONALLY POPULAR. ACCORDING TO ONE OF THE ONLY INDEPENDENT/RELIABLE POLLSTERS LEFT IN THE BUSINESS — THE BATTLEGROUND POLL — PRESIDENT BUSH’S PERSONAL APPROVAL/LIKABILITY RATING HAS NEVER FALLEN BELOW 60%! Conversely, Bill Clinton’s PA rating never managed to climb above the 40 percentile range!]
Of course, President George W Bush learned from another “sucky” president who was dismissed by the overrated Bill Buckley as a mere “Speech Reader in Chief”:
REALITY CHECK: PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN . . .
Per Gallup, President Reagan experienced sub-par job approval ratings (30s/40s) for much of his presidency.
In fact, by 1987, 60% of Republicans/conservatives indicated that they DEFINITELY wanted a new direction and, even if it were possible, would NOT vote for President Reagan again!
By 1993, 61% of Americans considered Reagan’s economic policies a FAILURE (Gallup)!
Yet at his funeral, President Reagan was lauded by Republicans and Democrats alike and is now considered one of the greatest presidents of all time! . . . I predict the same result for President George W Bush!
For more insight (and several REALITY CHECKS), please read the following editorial from COMMENTARY magazine:
IS CONSERVATISM FINISHED?
By Wilfred M. McClay
“. . . We also forget that the Reagan administration itself, far from being happily unified, was driven by internal battles between “pragmatists” and “ideologues,” conflicts that prefigured many of the policy battles of the present. And we forget that, outside the administration, REAGAN GOT PLENTY OF GRIEF FROM HIS OWN RIGHT AS WELL.”
You can read all about this ‘grief’ at
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/cm/main/viewArticle.aip?id=10812&page=all
-
BTW: DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED TO REAGAN AND HIS ADMINISTRATION IN 1987 AND MOST OF 1988?!
Well, I do; it was a nightmare! If you recall, Reagan was so politically and personally shaken by the Republican losses in the 1986, the Iran-Contra scandal, and the Stock Market crash that the White House DRASTICALLY curtailed his public appearances (PARTICULARLY his press conferences).
Additionally, Reagan was ‘forced’ to make MULTIPLE changes in his cabinet (and White House staff):
CHANGES IN PRESIDENT REAGAN’S CABINET, 1987
—Carlucci replaced Casper Weinberger at Defense
—new Secretary of Commerce
—new Secretary of Labor
—new Secretary of Transportation
Shortly thereafter, Thornburgh replaced Meese at Justice to become Reagan’s THIRD Attorney General.
CHANGES IN PRESIDENT REAGAN’S WHITE HOUSE STAFF, 1987
— Donald Regan was replaced by Howard Baker as Reagan’s Chief of Staff. Baker was subsequently replaced by Ken Duberstein. In total, Reagan employed FOUR Chiefs of Staff!
-
-
IF YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY (AND THE INTERNET) THINK OF OUR PRESIDENT, I SUGGEST YOU WATCH SOME OF THE VIDEOCLIPS FROM THE PRESIDENT’S VISIT TO GREENSBURG, KS TODAY:
http://www.kake.com/breakingnews/7359591.html
Seriously, why do you hate the troops...that's the question I've always been asked when I brought up the rather sensible position that contrary to Fox News and the 'hidden' news stories, it's not the lack of the media reporting the news, it's the fact it's just not happening.
That among other reasons is why it's unpopular. And frankly any Republican looking for any chance to win whatsoever better rework their message on the police action by the end of September. That is the political reality of it.
That was the first question that popped into my mind when I saw the words “private meeting”. However, I believe this did happen and that one of the 11 couldn’t wait to tell a buddy over drinks who told a buddy, etc., etc.
Isn't that Jack Nicholson's line from "A Few Good Men"? Anyway, you can complain about American voters, but in a democracy what they believe and how they vote, counts. And the sad truth is that, if things don't change in Iraq, voters are going to put the Dems into power, majorly. And the GOP may never get a chance to come back, if the Dems are as ruthless as they're capable of being, in rigging the system.
Good troll bait thread!
His best buddies from the Interstate highway restrooms might well tell him everybody is ready for defeat, but it's simply not true, and others of us know very well that if we walk away from the looming genocide in Iraq where the former slavemasters, the Sunni Arabs, take over and punish their former slaves, the Shia, no one in the world is going going to want American troops present in their countries.
We'll end up having to fight the Germans, Poles and Brits before this is over.
Frankly, I'd much rather duke it out with that Congress-critter myself, today, painted blue, carrying bronze knives, down there on Memorial bridge than to put up with more of his nonsense.
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.