Go to hell, Jeb.
-
Jeb has always been my favorite Bush, but this[^] is a real piece of work. SO we are supposed to forget the most successful era for conservatives since Cooledge when virtually every problem we have has your family's finger prints all over it? Lets forget the Bush era, asshole. How about people like you fighting back and promoting conservative principles rather than trying to figure out how to be collectivism lite?
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Jeb has always been my favorite Bush, but this[^] is a real piece of work. SO we are supposed to forget the most successful era for conservatives since Cooledge when virtually every problem we have has your family's finger prints all over it? Lets forget the Bush era, asshole. How about people like you fighting back and promoting conservative principles rather than trying to figure out how to be collectivism lite?
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote: SO we are supposed to forget the most successful era for conservatives since Cooledge Define successful.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Stan Shannon wrote: SO we are supposed to forget the most successful era for conservatives since Cooledge Define successful.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Reagan was a success, spin it however you like.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Reagan was a success, spin it however you like.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote: Reagan was a success, spin it however you like It appears you are afraid that it would be easy to point out that he was only middling-successful. Certainly the tax cuts he and the man you trash-mouthed yesterday worked well. But he campaigned on promises of cutting both taxes and spending. Instead he spent like no-one since Roosevelt, driving our national debt and our deficit sky-high. However, most folks see Ronnie through rose-colored glasses. Some conservatives have deified him, carefully forgetting that he was a man who often worked with the Democrats, including the liberals, and who never let his political philosophy become a personal vendetta. Ironically, it was his affable manner and his willingness to listen than allowed him the successes he did achieve.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Stan Shannon wrote: Reagan was a success, spin it however you like It appears you are afraid that it would be easy to point out that he was only middling-successful. Certainly the tax cuts he and the man you trash-mouthed yesterday worked well. But he campaigned on promises of cutting both taxes and spending. Instead he spent like no-one since Roosevelt, driving our national debt and our deficit sky-high. However, most folks see Ronnie through rose-colored glasses. Some conservatives have deified him, carefully forgetting that he was a man who often worked with the Democrats, including the liberals, and who never let his political philosophy become a personal vendetta. Ironically, it was his affable manner and his willingness to listen than allowed him the successes he did achieve.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
I don't disagree with much of that. Although, I fail to see why he should be lionized for his efforts to work with democrats who hated him and villified him during his administration nearly as much as they did W. That was his great weakness, and is the great weakness of the republican party in general. It is a weakness the democrats certainly do not suffer from.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
I don't disagree with much of that. Although, I fail to see why he should be lionized for his efforts to work with democrats who hated him and villified him during his administration nearly as much as they did W. That was his great weakness, and is the great weakness of the republican party in general. It is a weakness the democrats certainly do not suffer from.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote: Although, I fail to see why he should be lionized for his efforts to work with democrats who hated him and villified him during his administration nearly as much as they did W. Given him credit for succeeding is not quite the same as lionizing him. Had he chosen the hate-filled vitriolic approach you favor, his successes would have been far fewer and the vilification far more successful. Stan Shannon wrote: It is a weakness the democrats certainly do not suffer from. Right now the Democrats suffer from the same weakness the Republicans displayed during 2000 - 2006. They think they are invincible when they are simple the lesser of two evils. Their strength is that Obama knows this and is doing his best to get his agenda passed before 2010, let alone 2012. The great weakness of the Republicans is their vulnerability to the social conservatives who would rather have the republicans become a permanent minority or even go the way of the Whigs when a centrist party replaces them. The childish back-biting and petty politics going on right now is Obama's best bet for maintain his majority in Congress in 2010.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Stan Shannon wrote: Although, I fail to see why he should be lionized for his efforts to work with democrats who hated him and villified him during his administration nearly as much as they did W. Given him credit for succeeding is not quite the same as lionizing him. Had he chosen the hate-filled vitriolic approach you favor, his successes would have been far fewer and the vilification far more successful. Stan Shannon wrote: It is a weakness the democrats certainly do not suffer from. Right now the Democrats suffer from the same weakness the Republicans displayed during 2000 - 2006. They think they are invincible when they are simple the lesser of two evils. Their strength is that Obama knows this and is doing his best to get his agenda passed before 2010, let alone 2012. The great weakness of the Republicans is their vulnerability to the social conservatives who would rather have the republicans become a permanent minority or even go the way of the Whigs when a centrist party replaces them. The childish back-biting and petty politics going on right now is Obama's best bet for maintain his majority in Congress in 2010.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
Given him credit for succeeding is not quite the same as lionizing him. Had he chosen the hate-filled vitriolic approach you favor, his successes would have been far fewer and the vilification far more successful.
The fact that you can call my speech hate-filled considerd what the conservatives, including Reagan, is actually pretty damned pathetic. You want hate speech, look at how Sarah Palin has been treated. There is no greater example.
Oakman wrote:
Right now the Democrats suffer from the same weakness the Republicans displayed during 2000 - 2006. They think they are invincible when they are simple the lesser of two evils. Their strength is that Obama knows this and is doing his best to get his agenda passed before 2010, let alone 2012.
Like Reagan, and most other republicans, George Bush bent over backwards to get along with the dems even as he was being beaten senseless by those same people. That is why we are in trouble. I agree with you about Obama though. He is not going to let this opportunity pass him by.
Oakman wrote:
The great weakness of the Republicans is their vulnerability to the social conservatives who would rather have the republicans become a permanent minority or even go the way of the Whigs when a centrist party replaces them. The childish back-biting and petty politics going on right now is Obama's best bet for maintain his majority in Congress in 2010.
"Social Conservatism" is just code for the traditional American society that is under attack. It is what we always were, and, along with free market capitalism, what made us great, rich and powerful. Consevatives will not abandon it. When the radicalism of liberals and libertarians finally fail, and they will, it will be there ready to reassert itself.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Oakman wrote:
Given him credit for succeeding is not quite the same as lionizing him. Had he chosen the hate-filled vitriolic approach you favor, his successes would have been far fewer and the vilification far more successful.
The fact that you can call my speech hate-filled considerd what the conservatives, including Reagan, is actually pretty damned pathetic. You want hate speech, look at how Sarah Palin has been treated. There is no greater example.
Oakman wrote:
Right now the Democrats suffer from the same weakness the Republicans displayed during 2000 - 2006. They think they are invincible when they are simple the lesser of two evils. Their strength is that Obama knows this and is doing his best to get his agenda passed before 2010, let alone 2012.
Like Reagan, and most other republicans, George Bush bent over backwards to get along with the dems even as he was being beaten senseless by those same people. That is why we are in trouble. I agree with you about Obama though. He is not going to let this opportunity pass him by.
Oakman wrote:
The great weakness of the Republicans is their vulnerability to the social conservatives who would rather have the republicans become a permanent minority or even go the way of the Whigs when a centrist party replaces them. The childish back-biting and petty politics going on right now is Obama's best bet for maintain his majority in Congress in 2010.
"Social Conservatism" is just code for the traditional American society that is under attack. It is what we always were, and, along with free market capitalism, what made us great, rich and powerful. Consevatives will not abandon it. When the radicalism of liberals and libertarians finally fail, and they will, it will be there ready to reassert itself.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
You want hate speech, look at how Sarah Palin has been treated
I'm really not interested in who started it. You children need to stop. It's giving me a headache.
Stan Shannon wrote:
George Bush bent over backwards to get along with the dems
Which is why, four years out of eight, he had his budget passed by reconciliation?
Stan Shannon wrote:
"Social Conservatism" is just code for the traditional American society that is under attack.
Actually it's code for Shari'a law. Bapistisofascism. Prejudice, pettiness, and paranoia.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Jeb has always been my favorite Bush, but this[^] is a real piece of work. SO we are supposed to forget the most successful era for conservatives since Cooledge when virtually every problem we have has your family's finger prints all over it? Lets forget the Bush era, asshole. How about people like you fighting back and promoting conservative principles rather than trying to figure out how to be collectivism lite?
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Jeb has always been my favorite Bush,
Which isn't saying much, as he's still a Bush. I voted *against* GWB in 2000 precisely because he is his father's son. The vote I cast for him in 2004 was cast so that I not, by my inaction, make it easier for the damned-fool Democrats to destroy the country by refusing to face the reality before us.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
You want hate speech, look at how Sarah Palin has been treated
I'm really not interested in who started it. You children need to stop. It's giving me a headache.
Stan Shannon wrote:
George Bush bent over backwards to get along with the dems
Which is why, four years out of eight, he had his budget passed by reconciliation?
Stan Shannon wrote:
"Social Conservatism" is just code for the traditional American society that is under attack.
Actually it's code for Shari'a law. Bapistisofascism. Prejudice, pettiness, and paranoia.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Have you ever confessed you are wrong on a subject when presented with a logical idea? Do you always have to be right?
-
Have you ever confessed you are wrong on a subject when presented with a logical idea? Do you always have to be right?
Bassam Saoud wrote:
Have you ever confessed you are wrong on a subject when presented with a logical idea
Facts, yes. Frequently as a matter of fact. "Logical ideas" - not sure I know what you mean. Are you referring to classical logic which is always based on assumptions, not facts? Or using the word as so many do, as a synonym for rational which pretty much always carries the connotation of inference or thought process which needs must be explained very carefully and step by step to convince me to change what is essentially belief and not knowledge? At any rate, when it comes to beliefs the answer would have to be: infrequently, but it has been known to happen. How about you? If I searched among your posts, could I find one where you said something like, 'I was wrong and you were right?"
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin