topcat wrote:
> "Vandar" <vandar69@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:rVsqj.3492$Sa1.3393@news02.roc.ny...
>
>>topcat wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Cure_Ewan" <karrde_smuggler_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:focld0$2v6$1@news.albasani.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Vandar" <vandar69@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:xphqj.3416$Sa1.2019@news02.roc.ny...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>topcat wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"zob" <zob@ cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:gdoiq39jql4h1m8b2k6sd8vsvbhhbig2la@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>>Karrde's opinion is not the "narrow minority opinion" when speaking to
>>>>>>true conservatives. When a large group of people stay home or vote Dem
>>>>>>in Nov, as Karrde says, the Republican party will once again throw up
>>>>>>their hands and say "What happened?".
>>>>>
>>>>>Once again? When did they do that the first time? Certainly not in the
>>>>>last two Presidential elections.
>>>>
>>>>206, but apparently nobody was listening.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Exactly. The Repubs lost Congress because they decided to act like
>>>liberals. Next they will lose the White House.
>>
>>They lost Congress because the country finally got fed up with Bush's
>>rampant stupidity. It's a rare day when this country is better off with a
>>stalemate, but Bush gave us that day.
>>He is a horrible President and Congress paid for it.
>>
>>
>>>>>>For every voter like you McCain gets, he'll lose two conservatives.
>>>>>
>>>>>And those two he'll lose will sink the country further by voting for the
>>>>>absolute worst candidate this country has ever had. Great strategy.
>>>>>Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>Any of the three major contenders still standing would qualify as "worst
>>>>candidate this country has ever had."
>>>>
>>>>Four years of hell to set the party back on the right track vs. turning
>>>>the Republican party into a bunch of copycat Liberals? My choice is
>>>>made. I only hope the Conservative wing can gain control of Congress to
>>>>help cushion the blow of the next four years.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Don't worry, if the conservative wing isn't in control initially, it will
>>>be after the first mid-terms.
>>>
>>>Btw, I was talking to one of my friends/business associates today. He
>>>asked me who I voted for in the primary. I said Romney. He said "Me too".
>>>He's an "Ayn Rand" disciple, what they call an "individualist", I guess.
>>>I told him about all the people I've been speaking with who have pledged
>>>not to vote for McCain. He said add him to the list. This is another guy
>>>who *always* votes Republican, but won't this time.
>>>
>>>The funny thing is McCain wants *us* to change for the good of the party,
>>>how about him dropping out for the good of the party?
>>
>>Because it wouldn't be for the good of the party. The party needs to get
>>back to its roots and McCain is MUCH closer to that than Bush or Romney
>>has ever been.
>>
>
>
> You're wrong here, imo, Vandar. You know I like you and respect your
> opinions even when I don't agree with them, but I don't think you give Bush
> a fair shake. As I've said before, the Bush Presidency would get a "good"
> grade from me. Not "great", but good. I think you've been somewhat
> brainwashed by the tide of Bush bashing.
It's his lack of conservatism that gets to me. His spending habits have
been out of this world, he's not a very good orator, and his diplomatic
skills leave much to be desired.
BTW, I don't care if you like me or respect me. AGREE WITH ME! :)
> Has he spent too much? Yes.
> Has he pandered to liberals too much for no return? Yes
> Should he have invaded Iraq? I say yes, but maybe that's your beef with him.
The only problem I had with that was the timing. We didn't finish the
job in Afghanistan and Bush diverted his attention to Iraq as soon as he
could. I have no problem with our ousting of Hussein. It needed to
happen at some point. I just think he should have waited until we had a
few more heads on platters (bin Laden, al Zawahiri, and Mullah Omar).
In all honesty, I think we should've just nuked Afghanistan on 9/12. Had
we done that, I would have no qualms with the invasion of Iraq at all.
The post-invasion plan sure sucked though.
> After invading Iraq, should a better plan have been in place? Yes, but no
> war goes as planned.
Very true. I blame the Rumsfeld Doctrine for that though. Bush had a
decision to make concerning Iraq - the Rumsfeld Doctrine of "minimal
necessary force" or the Powell Doctrine of "overwhelming force". He did
not choose wisely, that's why Powell left and Iraq became a mess.
> But he's also protected the homeland and kept the economy fairly strong.
We have been attack-free since 9/11. I do credit him for that. He moved
the enemy's target from here to Iraq, the "attack them over there so
they don't attack us over here" mantra did work.
> I don't know if you saw the article I posted about how the Bush economy
> compares pretty favorably to the Clinton economy. I'm sure you've made some
> decent cash during his term, as have I.
Oh yeah, but I've always believed that a person's ability to make a buck
doesn't depend on the yahoo in the White House. Clinton just rode the
wave with the rest of us and that bubble burst before he left office. If
I knew 15 years ago what I know now, I'd be an extremely wealthy retiree.
> Other than the constant stream of negative liberal press, I don't understand
> exactly why otherwise intelligent people seem to hate Bush for no reason.
> Maybe you can explain it to me. That said, if he could run again, I would
> not vote for him, but probably not for the same reasons you wouldn't.
I just couldn't bring myself to vote for him in 2000 because of his
business record. He failed at a few things before becoming Governor.
That made me question his ability to act as the country's CEO.
> I'm fed up with his pandering to liberals, and I can just see John McCain doing
> the same thing. That's why I won't vote for him.
No matter who is in White House, they will need to compromise with the
opposing party on some issues. With immigration, for instance, that's a
very difficult problem to solve and he's just trying to find an
acceptable answer. He found out that his reform package wasn't an
acceptable answer (to us) so he ditched that idea.
> I honestly think Romney would be the best President out of the group that is
> left. He has executive skills. He wants to deport illegals. He understands
> business and the economy.
That he does. Many people have said that he is a very good businessman,
and I have always said that I think a successful private sector CEO
would make the best President - leave the politics to Congress.
That said, he has done a complete about face since the 90s on many
issues. He also wears his religion on his sleeve, going so far as to say
that secularism is a religion and is wrong, while giving a speech
calling for religious tolerance. I can't stomach that.
