Reagan Country
Posted on 06/03/2002 10:04:46 AM PDT by hchutch
Just the headline
Ha!!
~eh??
Be careful approaching stop lights, OK?
You've patience enough for 10, my friend; now, when to apply your's is totally up to you.
Just never permit the Liberal-Socialists of our Lamestream any say in your choice, is all.
...really; that'd be the extent of my concern 'bout how & when you do or don't use your patience.
I never said it didn't; nor, have you implied I did.
Just so that point's clear from the get-go.
Truth is & from my POV?
I do not know why these moves have been made; do not totally understand what the game plan is here.
Nonetheless, I simply have a gut-level confidence there lies a very good reason behind this man's actions.
I'm simply not going to tear him apart, now; that is what the miscreant Leftists do.
They're the ones professed at second-guessing, damning, tarring & smearing our side.
Certainly not me.
When election time comes -- some months down the line -- will be the time for my decision making; based, on all the facts you & people of your POV have so aptly & conscientiously recorded.
My adjudication of this POTUS' performance, policies, & leadership will be closely scrutinized.
"I simply look at the numbers, the facts, and the direction the country is headed from a fiscal standpoint. That is how you gauge if we are becoming more socialistic or not. And we HAVE become more socialistic with Bush's blubbery budgets."
It would appear so...
But the appearance(s) may very well turn-out to not be meant for my [our] eyes, SoA.
What is expected of you, me, us & IF we claim to be conservatives?
Is a little faith-based loyalty; &, NOT faith OR loyalty as framed by the pathetic, sickening sycophantic demons, harpies & flying monkeys in the Liberal-Socialist Lamestream!
...& like love is blind sometimes; so, is faith when it comes to politics in America.
First off, Rush didn't call Dubyuh "George W. Algore"...Limbaugh simply read an email from a listener who did. And as for that cartoon, I've now heard about it twice but when I went and checked our the EIB website, it wasn't there. I recall Rush's none-too-flattering rendition of the "typical FReeper" and I chafed at that, but in hindsight, it was rather funny. I suspect his parody of Bush is similar. Did you hear Shanklin's "Bad Mood on the Right" sung to CCR's "Bad Moon Risin'" he played today?! LOL...I can see Dubyuh gettin' a chuckle outta that.
"If Rush truly cared for Bush, why didn't he call the WH first? A humble person, someone who had feelings for Bush, would have given them a heads up, behind the scenes and allowed Bush to be the one to make the first remarks on the report. Fred Barnes last night, read excerpts from the report and Rush totally, completely misled his audience. It was a shabby publicity stunt."
I think Dubyuh is as pleased with his independence from Rush as Rush is with Dubyuh...it would behoove neither for those two to be seen as working in concert. But I disagree that Rush misled his listeners...the report DID appear to give credence to the Leftist EnviroWhackos assertion that Global Warming is a FACT and that it was most likely a result of human actions. Those aren't points I'm willing to concede as I've seen much good research to the contrary. In the end, Dubyuh came down on the side of Rush, disavowing the Report released by "The Bureaucracy."
FReegards...MUD
I've been following the debate. Some may not quite "get" what is meant by "stealth conservativism" --- that conservativism not passing the other litmus tests, is not [t]here, in spite of all the FRPRs who keep lauding Bush's "achievements" in the name of "we, on faith, really just have a feeling we know what he's up to and therefore because we ... think ... we ... know, ... he's ... done ... quite ... a ... lot" ---> like Clinton's "accomplishments" which were the feelings of having attained something --- feelings ONLY in the hearts and minds of liberals ---- based upon their sensitivity to Clinton's use of various socialistic jingoisms.
Which is a brief comment on how I've noticed other folks saying, not only myself saying it, that Bush is sort of the Republicans' version of Clinton.
Depends upon what the meaning (as Bush uses meanings) of what the term "compassionate" "is;" or it gives new meaning to it (pick either or both).
In spite of the list of Bush's giving away our VAST RIGHTS in exchange for attaboys from Daschle --- construed to be conservative accomplishments for all to see --- Bush is viewed by his apologencia as a master at political compromise(!) ... while he uses a formula whereby he gives quite a lot of other peoples' money and property in exchange for "beads of bi-partisanship;" not to mention his utter failure to prosecute for violations of the law(s), Clinton Administrators' (and "Executive Administrators Associates'") transgressions.
To wit: when the Bush apologencia go to Yellowstone Park and pick up some fallen eagle feathers and takes them back to the motel and / or awaiting bus, they will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of at least one politically-correct government agency's skewed imagination. While leftists handling feathers go free --- chalked into the category of political capital to be used at some future date.
Which goes to Bush's incredible "selective integrity" --- his failures, many, to uphold the equal application of the law(s).
I'm sorry, but in my book, and in George Washington's, you've either got integrity or you do not, and George W. Bush is wanting.
Except for the simple fact that my relating where Bush is falling down, on matters of defense, would reveal what I wish not to, here stateside, I can only say that he is darn near an embarrassment at how far behind the curve he is.
The statements of his administrators are laughable at how SERIOUSLY they regard the public for not knowing much and how, therefore, the Bush [still running the Clinton] Administration has as its first objective in this war, the coverup of, and immunity from prosecution pertaining to, MAJOR LEAGUE as well as MINOR LEAGUE SCREWUPS!
Bush is an executive boss but not a leader who leads by awareness of our might, our resources, and our freedoms.
Because frankly, they are not put forth to him on a one-page list.
"If only he had seen the threat," (presumably on yet another one-pager) he says, "he would have done something about it."
That is the most irresponsible of Presidential statements I have heard since "I did not have sex with that woman!"
There's a bunch of bull floating around the public eye, fed by the media, that "something must be done" about our intelligence problems vis a vis our concentration of the flow of info.
Well I'm here to tell you that the requirement is as old as military ventures and many times in the past, Ray Cline, who wrote the outlines for the C.I.A., etc., has addressed the matters.
And Ray and George's dad "go way back."
So please do not try to tell me that George W. Bush was "in the dark," and that the flow of intelligence is not concentrated because of the government not having the power (it needs MORE(?! <--- NO!!!!!) ... nor within the power of the President to correct!
It would not be the truth.
I agree...8^D
"NBC Nightly News credited Rush with the remarks, when they played the clip the other night."
The Networks are not known for allowing the Truth to get in the way of a good story.
"The algore/Bush morphing apparently remained on his site yesterday-it was damn ugly and I found it personally offensive."
While I never saw it, I agree that I wouldn't have been to happy with Rush for such a stunt...then again, he's the one with the $quarter-billion contract, not me.
FReegards...MUD
(Boy is this a long thread- guess Rush has really touched off a firestorm.)
Limbaugh's not in the business of giving the RATS a free pass, and even while questioning Dubyuh's strategery, he's taken time out to criticize L'il Dick Gephardt and TinyTom D'asshole. In fact, you could make the case that Rush has been too easy on Bush until this week, with very little condemnation for the Steel and Lumber Tariffs, the Farm Bill, and the Education Bill. Make no mistake, Rush'll be in Dubyuh's corner come next Fall...the level of enthusiasm of that support, though, will be dependent upon Dubyuh returning to his conservative self.
Now get back to work...MUD
The pity is I absolutely believe Dubyuh is capable of the kind of leadership we seek. Somehow, though, I sense he's being misled by advisors who would willingly sell conservative principles down the river in exchange for a couple points bump in the polls. Long-term, I think Dubyuh and the GOP could do major damage to their credibility with the Party's base....The "whining" of Fiscal Conservatives needs to be appreciated by the Bush Administration as the CONSTRUCTIVE Criticism it is...we're not trying to undermine Dubyuh's success, we're trying to save him and the GOP from the Milquetoast Moderate wing of the Party that wouldn't know Conservative Principles if they bit them on the behind!!
Amen. It appears that the ‘milquetoast moderate’ wing (a wing in which many supposed conservatives seem to take up at least temporary residence more and more often) is quite immune to wake up calls, just as it appears that the sins of the (‘read my lips’) father have been visited upon his son.
I, for one, intend to continue to whine….and steel myself against the ‘Bush hater’ label. It’s the sticks and stones thing. As I recall, our Founders honed whining to an art form. Let’s hope the powers that be begin listening before we have to consider the same options the Founders did. Life and liberty, as guaranteed in their hard-won blueprint, are not to be taken for granted. And the more capitulation by conservatives to those who place little value on either (no matter the supposed stealth political rationale behind their concessions to the leftists....who always seize the opportunity to use milquetoast to their advantage), the less their conservatism rings true. Bush may be a conservative at heart, but there comes a point when.... if it claims to be an eagle, but looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck....
I guess taking over Afgahnistan and not getting hit again by al Queda is "nothing". I should have stopped reading right there, but I didn't...
"If only he had seen the threat," (presumably on yet another one-pager) he (the President) says, "he would have done something about it."
"That is the most irresponsible of Presidential statements I have heard since "I did not have sex with that woman!"" - First Salute
Now how would you know this? A fly on the wall perhaps? To make this comparison would indicate first hand knowledge that the President is lying.
If you are not in the White House, or directly in the chain of command, then your statement might be considered slanderous.
Then again, if you are in the White House or/and the chain of command, why didn't you 'connect the dots' and notify the President or(insert alphabet agency here ___)?
5.56mm
You hit on the issue of integrity, defined as all aspects of one's personality serving the whole. No pun intended, but in Bush's case it seems to be a "hole" not a whole.
IOW, there is no there there, that I can see. He is completely inconsistant, and appears to act on no consistent principles of any kind.
Once again, great post, my friend.
"Talk" to you next week.
I still believe Dubyuh has to have learned a thing or two from his Daddy's needless demise, but I remain unimpressed with his domestic agenda to date. Perhaps that's what it takes to get elected to America's highest office these days, but it seems like a little intestinal fortitude would go a long way in securing the base for a significant run against the Federal Leviathan, were Dubyuh so inclined.
"I, for one, intend to continue to whine….and steel myself against the ‘Bush hater’ label."
I'm no BushBasher, either, and am perfectly willing to verbally-whup any FReeper's butt who alleges otherwise...still, it is unnerving that so many on OUR side of the aisle are perfectly willing to excuse governmental excesses by Dubyuh that they'd never allow by Der SchleekMeister. Contrary to popular FReeper belief, Principles really DO matter!!
"Life and liberty, as guaranteed in their hard-won blueprint, are not to be taken for granted. And the more capitulation by conservatives to those who place little value on either (no matter the supposed stealth political rationale behind their concessions to the leftists....who always seize the opportunity to use milquetoast to their advantage), the less their conservatism rings true. Bush may be a conservative at heart, but there comes a point when.... if it claims to be an eagle, but looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...."
Folks whose opinions I trust and respect, like Landru and C.T., keep telling me to be patient, so I shall, for now. However, attaining Power for Power's sake is a Devil's Bargain if we willingly forfeit those anti-Big-Guv'ment Principles that I use to justify my passion...and I look for the day that the Bush Administration calls in all those chits he's apparently winning from the middle-of-the-roaders in exchange for these so-called "compromises" on domestic policy.
FReegards...MUD
Thanks for the effort (and I’m glad I ‘impressed’ you. That wasn’t my intent….nor your real reaction. But your effort fell short of my understanding it, yet again. Either my brain cells aren’t working the way they used to, or we are looking at the role of leader of the free world from vastly different perspectives.
You seem to think rhetoric and intentions are worth more than the plug nickel’s value I place on them. Follow through is worth its weight in gold.
The fact that Bush got a (relatively small) tax cut through congress, nominated conservative judges (but has spent very little effort pushing to have those nominations confirmed), and is talking lots about privatizing social security (Political suicide? You must live in a different neck of the woods than I. Where I hail from, people have been calling for its privatization for eons) is small consolation when compared with the larger issues upon which he has leaned markedly to the left.
I’ll ask you what I did in my original post: Have you looked into the specifics of Bush’s stance on (or signature on the bills that represent) the Patriot Act? The farm bill? The education bill? Immigration reform? Campaign finance reform? Homeland security? Federalization of airport security? Healthcare entitlements? Most of these have already been signed into law, or have received the President’s temporary seal of approval. Not even by the wildest stretch of the imagination do any of these measures fall under the label of conservative/liberty-preserving/get-government-out-of our-lives leadership. In fact, they represent huge leaps in government assuming yet more unconstitutional power over, and intrusion into, our lives (and stealing still more out of our pockets in order to do so). It’s known as a lose/lose situation, and Americans are so used to being on the losing end of it (is there any other?) that they have lost the ability to summon outrage.
Bush is trying to repair the damage by treating the members of Congress courteously and respectfully.
There is a vast difference between courtesy and capitulation. One is the sign of a gentleman. The other is a sign of compromise of principle. And when that compromise is offered to those who view it as a symptom of weakness, it simply lays the groundwork for more of the same (It’s the old give‘em an inch maxim….) It emboldens scoundrels.
You suggested that I be objective enough to give him the credit he’s due. I believe that, for the most part, the President has conducted the (non-homeland) war on terrorism well. I commend him for withdrawing from the ABM treaty. I commend him for nominating conservative judges (but find him at fault for not exercising the pressure needed to see them confirmed)..... He also has good posture and wears nice ties.
Trouble is, the debit side of the ledger far outweighs the credits.
He is a lot better than his father, but not as good as Reagan.
Here we are on common ground. (There’ll never be another Reagan, but I’ll settle for a reasonable facsimile. So far, I see little resemblance at all.)
Sadly, I have not. This is not an excuse, but is offered to allow the realization that I might not have been the reason you posted this diatribe.
in spite of all the FRPRs who keep lauding Bush's "achievements" in the name of "we, on faith, really just have a feeling we know what he's up to and therefore because we ... think ... we ... know, ... he's ... done ... quite ... a ... lot" ---> like Clinton's "accomplishments" which were the feelings of having attained something --- feelings ONLY in the hearts and minds of liberals ---- based upon their sensitivity to Clinton's use of various socialistic jingoisms.
I imagine FRPR means FreeRepublic Public Relations, a guess if you will. And further, I must assume, since you put me in your list, I am 'one of them'. I disagree, not solely for my earlier statement. I'm not much of a poster around here, I prefer to a) read, and b) post if I find my opinion unrepresented or misrepresented. In fact, I never made a post to this thread. I did however post to another thread on the Bush/Global Warming flap.
In that post I was consistently defending the idea that maybe the report was correct. I do not believe I was, in any way, a cheerleader for Bush on this issue.
Hence, I'll leave the rest of your diatribe to those who you have identified as participants in this 'FRPR' stuff.
Thank you.
I'm sorry, but in my book, and in George Washington's, you've either got integrity or you do not, and George W. Bush is wanting.
You, and Washington, and I read the same books.
Your description of Bush supporters claiming that they ‘just have a feeling they know what he’s up to...think...know...he’s...done...quite...a...lot’ is priceless.
Bush is viewed by his apologencia as a master at political compromise(!) ... while he uses a formula whereby he gives quite a lot of other peoples' money and property [don’t forget liberties] in exchange for "beads of bi-partisanship;" not to mention his utter failure to prosecute for violations of the law(s), Clinton Administrators' (and "Executive Administrators Associates'") transgressions.
The blue part? It’s all done in the name of national healing, don’tcha know? We all have to get past the lying, and the perjury, and the treason, and the abuse of power, and the shredding of the Constitution, and the ....
(oops….I’m festering….not healing….sorry….just call me un-American….)
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.