Bush's speech

[bounce]

Leftest! me a leftest? You really are a fucking moonbat.

When what you propose to happen and want to happen doesn't just like I've said it wont. I am soooo going to rub your nose in it.

If you want to rub my nose in it, you must see that I am kicking your ass on this issue. Please feel free, but you're TOTALLY missing the point.

It's the politicians who are going to get their noses rubbed in it. Bush is voluntarily throwing his legacy away (just as Clintoon did).

The backlash is just now beginning.

Just like with Gay Marriage, the attempt is to "just do it" and the American public will "get over it" as the inevitability finally occurs to them.

It's futile to resist!
It's already happening!
Get over it!

Then, of course, we saw the results of the next election.

Any politician who votes for a bullshit amnesty bill WILL SUFFER FOR IT.

[cameron]

bounce said:

Leftest! me a leftest? You really are a fucking moonbat.

When what you propose to happen and want to happen doesn't just like I've said it wont. I am soooo going to rub your nose in it.

If you want to rub my nose in it, you must see that I am kicking your ass on this issue. Please feel free, but you're TOTALLY missing the point.

It's the politicians who are going to get their noses rubbed in it. Bush is voluntarily throwing his legacy away (just as Clintoon did).

The backlash is just now beginning.

Just like with Gay Marriage, the attempt is to "just do it" and the American public will "get over it" as the inevitability finally occurs to them.

It's futile to resist!
It's already happening!
Get over it!

Then, of course, we saw the results of the next election.

Any politician who votes for a bullshit amnesty bill WILL SUFFER FOR IT.

I'm real angry I'm emotional like that when someone makes many of the accusations against me that you have for having the nerve to think differently then you even calling my loyalty into question. You want to burn the house down if you don't get what you are not going to get, good do that I will do my best to convince conservatives that you and those that think like you should be chucked from the movement let them join the Buchananites in the political wilderness, but the conservative movement and those who want to be a part of it should not indulge the haters.

I'm done for sometime time now talk to ya in future.

Something for you to consider


Losing Now to Win Later, or, Geraghtyites v. Tapscottians
05/17 09:50 AM

The great Mark Tapscott has been chewing over the arguments on conservatives, GOP, and control of Congress, and offers more thoughts today.

He asks the important question of “what if” – specifically, what-if the Democrats win back one or both houses of Congress. The worst case scenario, he posits, would be a veto-proof Democratic majority that would ensure that “the War in Iraq would be lost, the Bush administration's successes in the War on Terror would be reversed, there would be disastrous tax and spending policies enacted and few if any conservative judicial nominees would be confirmed”.

Tapscott doubts this possibility will come to pass, pointing out the GOP’s advantage in Sun Belt demographics and that back in 1994, the GOP didn’t win a veto-proof majority. On paper, he’s right. However, I would point out that the president is not merely threatened by a veto-proof Democratic majority; he’s threatened by a veto-proof Democrat-and-RINO majority. Remember, after a bad year, the Senate Republican Caucus would have a lot less Santorums and Talents and the same number of Specters and Snowes. Put together the not-very-conservative Republicans with the Democratic majority, and you would have a sizable legislative majority, maybe veto-proof, maybe not.

(No matter where you’re sitting in the world right now, if you listen carefully, you can hear a distant voice yelling, “The Judges! Remember the Supreme Court Justices!!!” This is Hugh Hewitt, screaming himself hoarse in California.)

Beyond that, Mark offers an argument that has some merit – that a Democratic win would allow the public to see what a Speaker Pelosi and/or Majority Leader Reid would have to offer the country. “There would be lots of talk about insanities like impeachment, congressional investigations, repealing the Bush tax cuts and the like. But the lack of actual results would drive the Moonbats into venegeful desperation and a general revulsion among independent and conservative voters, with a bloody and perhaps permanently crippling splintering of the Democrats to follow.” I can see that happening. It really seems to be a likely scenario.

But I’ve also been thinking lately about how life rarely seems to go according to plan.

Screenwriter William Goldman wrote, “Nobody knows anything.” He was referring to it in the context of Hollywood, contending that no matter how smart or successful a film director, producer, or studio head became, they never really knew that a movie would be a hit. Sometimes the biggest stars and most successful directors turn out a flop. Sometimes a movie gets rave reviews, but audiences don’t like it. And there always seems to be some little-known low-budget movie that comes out of nowhere to be a surprise hit.

I think the “nobody knows anything” mantra is comparable to the world of politics. We can strongly suspect that voters would be repulsed by Speaker Pelosi and a Kos-style legislative agenda. But we don’t know for certain. Remember that a Democrat-controlled Congress is also likely to be getting astonishingly glowing press coverage. You know that roaring economy? You’ll start hearing about it, and it will all be credited to the Pelosi-Reid Economic Stimulus Bill passed in January 2007. Congressional hearings accusing oil companies of “illegal profits” will be welcomed by consumers frustrated by high gas prices. Bush’s approval rating will take another hit after he vetoes the “Every Voter Gets Free Health Care And Free Prescription Drugs And Rent Or Mortgage Subsidies And A Pony Too Act of 2007.” Senator John Kerry’s summit meeting with French President Jacques Chirac will be credited with dramatically reducing anti-Americanism around the world. And so on.

Maybe the public will strongly oppose the Democratic agenda after two years. But then again, maybe they’ll like it, or find parts of it they do like, or maybe they’ll just get used to them. The “let’s lose this year” strategy hands a bunch of Democrats the handy tool of incumbency to keep those seats. And in the Senate races, the candidates get to keep their seats until 2012.


Mark calls a two-year performance of a Democratic congressional majority “the perfect setup for a strengthened conservative majority to return in Congress in 2008, most likely with a White House occupant wise enough to recognize that the ‘emerging Republican (i.e conservative) majority’ had become a reality.”


Maybe. Or, you know, Republicans could skip the losing part and try the crazy idea of winning this year.

[bounce]

I'm real angry I'm emotional like that when someone makes many of the accusations against me that you have for having the nerve to think differently then you even calling my loyalty into question.

I haven't accused you of anything. However, yes, I do question your loyalty.

What you propose will bring an end to this country within 20 years.

You want to burn the house down if you don't get what you are not going to get, good do that I will do my best to convince conservatives that you and those that think like you should be chucked from the movement let them join the Buchananites in the political wilderness, but the conservative movement and those who want to be a part of it should not indulge the haters.

I have several responses to this:

1) Our current crop of politicians unwilling to address this issue are the ones "burning down the house."

2) I think Buchanan is a MORON!

3) You think anyone who wants to protect our way of life is a "hater." That's ridiculous. I THINK anyone who wants to allow illegals IN is a hater - an America hater.

I'm done for sometime time now talk to ya in future.

Something for you to consider


Losing Now to Win Later, or, Geraghtyites v. Tapscottians
05/17 09:50 AM

The great Mark Tapscott has been chewing over the arguments on conservatives, GOP, and control of Congress, and offers more thoughts today.

He asks the important question of “what if” – specifically, what-if the Democrats win back one or both houses of Congress. The worst case scenario, he posits, would be a veto-proof Democratic majority that would ensure that “the War in Iraq would be lost, the Bush administration's successes in the War on Terror would be reversed, there would be disastrous tax and spending policies enacted and few if any conservative judicial nominees would be confirmed”.

Right now, my FIRST priority is protecting THIS COUNTRY and OUR WAY OF LIFE. Bush is responsible for the war in Iraq. If he wants to throw all that away over this issue, so be it. That is WAY out of my control and I can't stop him from fucking his legacy.

He's done some incredibly great things. However, he's alredy on his knees about to join the ranks of the "Bridge Builder" axiom.

That's his choice.

Tapscott doubts this possibility will come to pass, pointing out the GOP’s advantage in Sun Belt demographics and that back in 1994, the GOP didn’t win a veto-proof majority. On paper, he’s right. However, I would point out that the president is not merely threatened by a veto-proof Democratic majority; he’s threatened by a veto-proof Democrat-and-RINO majority. Remember, after a bad year, the Senate Republican Caucus would have a lot less Santorums and Talents and the same number of Specters and Snowes. Put together the not-very-conservative Republicans with the Democratic majority, and you would have a sizable legislative majority, maybe veto-proof, maybe not.

You oughta inform HIM of this! He clearly doesn't get it. I can't even support him anymore to say nothing of "defend" him. I am at the point I couldn't care less what happens to him.

(No matter where you’re sitting in the world right now, if you listen carefully, you can hear a distant voice yelling, “The Judges! Remember the Supreme Court Justices!!!” This is Hugh Hewitt, screaming himself hoarse in California.)

If he doesn't get impeached, he'll still be able to appoint nominees. He has shown his base open contempt for quite awhile. There has been NO QUESTION about it since he was reelected.

Beyond that, Mark offers an argument that has some merit – that a Democratic win would allow the public to see what a Speaker Pelosi and/or Majority Leader Reid would have to offer the country. “There would be lots of talk about insanities like impeachment, congressional investigations, repealing the Bush tax cuts and the like. But the lack of actual results would drive the Moonbats into venegeful desperation and a general revulsion among independent and conservative voters, with a bloody and perhaps permanently crippling splintering of the Democrats to follow.” I can see that happening. It really seems to be a likely scenario.

Again, I suggest you let Bush know about this. He clearly doesn't seem to know or care.

But I’ve also been thinking lately about how life rarely seems to go according to plan.

Screenwriter William Goldman wrote, “Nobody knows anything.” He was referring to it in the context of Hollywood, contending that no matter how smart or successful a film director, producer, or studio head became, they never really knew that a movie would be a hit. Sometimes the biggest stars and most successful directors turn out a flop. Sometimes a movie gets rave reviews, but audiences don’t like it. And there always seems to be some little-known low-budget movie that comes out of nowhere to be a surprise hit.

I think the “nobody knows anything” mantra is comparable to the world of politics. We can strongly suspect that voters would be repulsed by Speaker Pelosi and a Kos-style legislative agenda. But we don’t know for certain. Remember that a Democrat-controlled Congress is also likely to be getting astonishingly glowing press coverage. You know that roaring economy? You’ll start hearing about it, and it will all be credited to the Pelosi-Reid Economic Stimulus Bill passed in January 2007. Congressional hearings accusing oil companies of “illegal profits” will be welcomed by consumers frustrated by high gas prices. Bush’s approval rating will take another hit after he vetoes the “Every Voter Gets Free Health Care And Free Prescription Drugs And Rent Or Mortgage Subsidies And A Pony Too Act of 2007.” Senator John Kerry’s summit meeting with French President Jacques Chirac will be credited with dramatically reducing anti-Americanism around the world. And so on.

Maybe the public will strongly oppose the Democratic agenda after two years. But then again, maybe they’ll like it, or find parts of it they do like, or maybe they’ll just get used to them. The “let’s lose this year” strategy hands a bunch of Democrats the handy tool of incumbency to keep those seats. And in the Senate races, the candidates get to keep their seats until 2012.


Mark calls a two-year performance of a Democratic congressional majority “the perfect setup for a strengthened conservative majority to return in Congress in 2008, most likely with a White House occupant wise enough to recognize that the ‘emerging Republican (i.e conservative) majority’ had become a reality.”


Maybe. Or, you know, Republicans could skip the losing part and try the crazy idea of winning this year.

[FightingFalcon]

cameron said:

bounce said:

Pretty funny... When you can't stand the news, attack the source.

It's a typical leftist ploy.

You are so transparent!

Leftest! me a leftest? You really are a fucking moonbat.

When what you propose to happen and want to happen doesn't just like I've said it wont. I am soooo going to rub your nose in it.

Anyone Bounce doesn't agree with is a Leftist.

Hell...I'm more conservative than Bounce and he had the nerve to call ME a leftist.

The irony is delicious....

[FightingFalcon]

mario said:

The RNC had the nerve to send me a letter this morning asking for more financial contributions.

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

If you don't agree with the party or it's leader anymore, why are you still even thinking about contributing to the party?

I don't understand people who have objections to a political party but stay with it. I just don't.

[bounce]

cameron said:

bounce said:

Pretty funny... When you can't stand the news, attack the source.

It's a typical leftist ploy.

You are so transparent!

Leftest! me a leftest? You really are a fucking moonbat.

When what you propose to happen and want to happen doesn't just like I've said it wont. I am soooo going to rub your nose in it.

You really ought to reread my post. I never called you a Leftist. I said you were using a typical Leftist PLOY!

You have REALLY gotten thin-skinned man.

Whew!

[cameron]

bounce said:

cameron said:

Leftest! me a leftest? You really are a fucking moonbat.

When what you propose to happen and want to happen doesn't just like I've said it wont. I am soooo going to rub your nose in it.

You really ought to reread my post. I never called you a Leftist. I said you were using a typical Leftist PLOY!

You have REALLY gotten thin-skinned man.

Whew!

You questioned my loyalty you fuck So don't talk to me about thin skinned. Your full of shit and what you want to have happen is not going to happen and what you want to have happen because of that is not going to happen. Trust me I'm going to around for that and I'm going to be rubbing your nose in it. You and 101 want to turn this into your own little right wing moonbat cave that's fine. I'm not coming back for awhile, it'll give me time to cool off and time for events to mature. In the mean time have fun in your cave.

[cameron]

fightingfalcon said:

cameron said:

Leftest! me a leftest? You really are a fucking moonbat.

When what you propose to happen and want to happen doesn't just like I've said it wont. I am soooo going to rub your nose in it.

Anyone Bounce doesn't agree with is a Leftist.

Hell...I'm more conservative than Bounce and he had the nerve to call ME a leftist.

The irony is delicious....

This guy thinks he is the conservative movement and without him and all the xenophobes that think like him, the movement will crumble. Well he is in for a rude awakening when he finds himself on the outside looking in just like Pat Buchanan . That's when my fun time with him will start.

[bounce]

cameron said:

fightingfalcon said:

Anyone Bounce doesn't agree with is a Leftist.

Hell...I'm more conservative than Bounce and he had the nerve to call ME a leftist.

The irony is delicious....

This guy thinks he is the conservative movement and without him and all the xenophobes that think like him, the movement will crumble. Well he is in for a rude awakening when he finds himself on the outside looking in just like Pat Buchanan . That's when my fun time with him will start.

Don't fucking leave!

Jesus man!

[bounce]

Running your ass off IS NOT what I'm trying to do!

[MARIO]

fightingfalcon said:

mario said:

The RNC had the nerve to send me a letter this morning asking for more financial contributions.

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

If you don't agree with the party or it's leader anymore, why are you still even thinking about contributing to the party?

I don't understand people who have objections to a political party but stay with it. I just don't.

First of all, because I contributed a lot to Bush in his re-election campaign. We've (Conservatives) been very generous to this President and have been unflinching in our defense of him from the wackos on the Left.

We expect results for giving the Party power in both the Executive and Legislative branches.

Bush and the Party have done good in terms of judges, tax cuts, and partial-birth abortion. But the remainder of his record on social issues is abysmal.

Say what you want about the political parties, but the reality is that they are here to stay. You have to work within either one of them to get what you want. You maintain influence by staying with the Party. Now I'm a proud Reagan Republican. But I'm going to throw any more of my money at George Bush and the RNC if this is what they're going to give me. Are they infinitely better than pelosi and the shitheads in the Democratic Party? YES!

But they sure as hell better understand that they're going to need a lot more on their side than the fact that they aren't Democrats.

BTW: I'll note that I'm very supportive of the House Republicans. They've done good with their power. It's the RINO's and morons in the Senate who have betrayed America time and again.

And George Bush is starting to piss me off.

[bounce]

mario said:

fightingfalcon said:

If you don't agree with the party or it's leader anymore, why are you still even thinking about contributing to the party?

I don't understand people who have objections to a political party but stay with it. I just don't.

First of all, because I contributed a lot to Bush in his re-election campaign. We've (Conservatives) been very generous to this President and have been unflinching in our defense of him from the wackos on the Left.

We expect results for giving the Party power in both the Executive and Legislative branches.

That's DAMN right! I donated $500 to the swift-boaters too.

Bush and the Party have done good in terms of judges, tax cuts, and partial-birth abortion. But the remainder of his record on social issues is abysmal.

Fuck an "A!" He's built 1000 bridges, but 1000 "atta-boy"s will not make up for one single "Aw-shit."

Say what you want about the political parties, but the reality is that they are here to stay. You have to work within either one of them to get what you want. You maintain influence by staying with the Party. Now I'm a proud Reagan Republican. But I'm going to throw any more of my money at George Bush and the RNC if this is what they're going to give me. Are they infinitely better than pelosi and the shitheads in the Democratic Party? YES!

But they sure as hell better understand that they're going to need a lot more on their side than the fact that they aren't Democrats.

BTW: I'll note that I'm very supportive of the House Republicans. They've done good with their power. It's the RINO's and morons in the Senate who have betrayed America time and again.

And George Bush is starting to piss me off.

Well said, Mario!

[MARIO]

cameron said:

fightingfalcon said:

Anyone Bounce doesn't agree with is a Leftist.

Hell...I'm more conservative than Bounce and he had the nerve to call ME a leftist.

The irony is delicious....

This guy thinks he is the conservative movement and without him and all the xenophobes that think like him, the movement will crumble. Well he is in for a rude awakening when he finds himself on the outside looking in just like Pat Buchanan . That's when my fun time with him will start.

Cameron, stop it. That's another tactic of the Left: Labeling those who support securing our border "xenophobes."

We support LEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Gawd.

[cameron]

mario said:

cameron said:

This guy thinks he is the conservative movement and without him and all the xenophobes that think like him, the movement will crumble. Well he is in for a rude awakening when he finds himself on the outside looking in just like Pat Buchanan . That's when my fun time with him will start.

Cameron, stop it. That's another tactic of the Left: Labeling those who support securing our border "xenophobes."

We support LEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Gawd.

Mario the left may in fact use that as a tactic. I assure that I am not. It is in fact something I truly fear is helping to make this such an emotional charged issue within Conservative ranks. Mario it is not unheard of for racist and bigots to hide behind our principled positions. It gives them cover to hide behind and if we are not vigilant in keeping them out they will be outed by our ideological opponents and used to discredit our ideas based on our principles.

[MARIO]

cameron said:

mario said:

Cameron, stop it. That's another tactic of the Left: Labeling those who support securing our border "xenophobes."

We support LEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Gawd.

Mario the left may in fact use that as a tactic. I assure that I am not. It is in fact something I truly fear is helping to make this such an emotional charged issue within Conservative ranks. Mario it is not unheard of for racist and bigots to hide behind our principled positions. It gives them cover to hide behind and if we are not vigilant in keeping them out they will be outed by our ideological opponents and used to discredit our ideas based on our principles.

Yes, Cameron, bot nobody HERE is racist.

We care about our country and we're sick and tired of seeing our country invaded.

Yes, I said INVADED.

We will cease being the greatest country in the world if this persists.