The New York Times put its latest poll results into a graphic that is worth seeing (click here). It shows the dramatic decline in approval for President Bush on several key issues. The public also thinks Democrats would do better than Republicans on all but two issues surveyed — several of them by huge margins. But will the discontent with Bush and the GOP translate into a Democratic takeover of Congress in November, given the number of Republican incumbents in safe districts and the Democrats’ history of blowing elections?
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- minutelady on Open thread 11/23
- Phantom on Open thread 11/23
- minutelady on Open thread 11/23
- XXX on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Let immigrants run
- Phantom on Let immigrants run
- XXX on Open thread 11/23
- Phantom on Too many exemptions
- Phantom on Too many exemptions
85 Comments
Absolutely it will. The American people are remembering why they trusted the Democratic Party with majority status for so many decades: Democrats take seriously the ideas of the common good and simple competence.
We know how to govern; Republicans don’t. The record speaks for itself.
And the sooner Democrats get back in power and get this country back on track, the sooner we can get George and Dick OUTTA THERE.
After all, it appears to be what the majority of the country wants.
I might put even money on a Democratic take over….But it will also take more then just the people blaming the Republicans for all that has gone wrong. It will take the democrats showing how that can do it right. Democrats, you can not just set back and ride on the hatred of everything Bush. Plans, plans, plans! I had said it sometime back. We do not need someone else to tell us the house is on fire! We need someone that knows the number to the fire department….That has been one of the Democratic parties greatest shortcomings.
People who have for years now argued that I am just not giving Bush and this administration a fair hearing are starting to agree with me.
I handle this return to reality with politeness. I dont’ remind them of all the times they told me I was dead wrong, just thank them for using their brain again.
I never thought anyone would kick the habit of the whitehouse koolaid and it’s happening.
I only hope that more Kansans stop and look at our own local politicians. Don’t forget how Roberts STILL hasn’t made steps to look into the faulty intelligence we are still finding from our leaders. Don’t forget how many Bush wannabes we have in our very own state of Kansas.
If there was ever a time for Democrats to come forward and clear the field it’s now. I only hope they are up to the task.
Please AMerica, don’t let Jeb Bush be our next president.
Yep, Roberts and maybe Brownback need to be booted along with George.
Checking my crystal ball..I see a fairly significant increase in Democratic seats in the US Legislature. If there is enough increase for a majority, then we can expect the final two years of the Bush administration to be characterized by infighting, no serious legislative progress, and essentially, a closed down government.
Hmmmm…that doesn’t sound all bad! Nor does it sound much different than right now…
Hey Ray welcome back! it seem like a year since seeing your name. You always seem to interject logic and reason…Of course of what use those two would be here I do not know! LoL. Welcome again.
The Dems will just say the elections were “stolen.” What else do you expect from the Victim Party. Yawn.
I for one will go against the tide and say that the Democrats will not take over. In fact, I’ll even bet they lose a few seats in the House and probably one in the Senate.
The Democrats are more fractured in their base and cannot unite. The people who voted Republican and the pass will continue to vote regardless of their discontent with the GOP and Bush.
The Third Way, a very Democrat progessive organization did a an analysis on the Democrats and found they have been losing ground among voters.
I don’t see Democrats changing their message of “hate Bush”. So they will be disconnected from the voters again.
http://www.third-way.com/data/product/file/36/Politics_of_Opportunity.pdf
Joe, you still tired?Sheesh
Joe Blow, that is.
Sorry CF, but the days of democrats that work for the good of the people have been long lost, and too many people have been driven away by the likes of the “New Democrat” strategy they brought us. The middle class working stiff was taught well by the clintons that they were not in their plans.
Phoney polls and advertisments being sold as news are not going to change the numbers that have left the democratic party. Heck even the democratic party quitely admits that the best they can hope for is a 60/40 split for the next generation. The fact is, the number is far worse than they know as those that will now only vote for independent candidates is going to further erode that estimate.The answer my friend is not in taking back the 50 seats lost in the house, the 8 in the senate, the 11 govonorships, the 1300 state legislative seats, the 9 state legislatures or even the 440 democratic office holders that became republicans after Clinton came to power. It is recognizing that the democratic leadership that has come to power is the problem and must be replaced. Republicans did not win any of these converts, the democrats lost them.
Good points sooory, and I can’t say I particularly dissagree as far as your point goes. What I think you fail to consider is, how fed up voters are with republican rule. All we get from republicans is corruption, incompetence, cronyism, and bad judgement. With these people, if it’s not one damn thing, it’s another.
Joe Williams, a third way? Not in this life. A vote for an independent or third party is a wasted vote.
Had enough?
Ybs
I don’t think that Bill Clinton himself that drove most of the losses of the Democratic party. He understood that the party needed the “middle ground”. The slide started with him put was really driven by the left end of the party. After Bush won in 2000 the left end of the party went ballistic and you had people from the extreme left come to power in top leadership.
I wouldnt be surprised to see House control see-saw over the next 3 election cycles, but as long as social conservatives like my parents (who were life long Democrats up until the late 90’s ) are despised by the party leadership, the Democrats are in for long term minority status.
The keys will be for the Democrats to (a) come up with good candidates in the various districts and (b) come up with a unifying theme similar to the never-fulfilled “Contract with America”
Whatever happened to those term limits Tanker Todd advocated?
XXX,I really wish I had failed to consider the degree with which people are fed up with republican rule, but the truth is that people have not forgotten that they recieved exactly the same things you mentioned from the Clintons. You won’t hear the MSM reminding anyone of it though and for some it is enough, Most however, are painfully aware that Bill Clinton’s legacy left us with:The first president ever impeached on personal corruptionThe most cabinet members ever under criminal investigationThe most convictions or guilty pleas of friends and associates. (even more than watergate)Largest number of witnesses that fled the country, and the Clinton’s help in doing so. (Chineese military agents)First president to be sued for sexual harrassement.The largest sexual harrassement lawsuit settlement.The greatest amount of illegal campain contributions both domestic and from abroadThe largest criminal plea agreement in illegal campaign contributions.The first president accused of rape.The first, First Lady under criminal investigation and first compelled to appear before a federal grand jury.His decision to sell the Chineese government guidance systems that allowed missles to strike US soil.
The American people will tolerate many things to the point of absurdity, but they will not return to a party in a meaningful way as long as these same individuals are allowed to remain before the democratic lime lights. Just ask the 7 million union members that left the AFL-CIO in part because of their continued support for the democratic party and will now vote only independent candidates that support their interests.I am certainly not saying that democrats will not pick up some seats this mid term. With all the things the republicans have done, it should be a sweep, but it will not be because most are going to be looking for the least worst candidate and when it comes down to party affilitation as a deciding factor, the Democrats will lose because of the impressions left by a few who will not go away.
Your points are well taken and quite valid Heckler. There is no doubt that Clinton did see a need to at least provide lip service to the middle ground, but in my opinion some of his actions were directly responsible for the rise to leadership for the far left. In any case, the bottom line is, the republicans never won anything. The democrats lost it, and that is much more difficult to regain IMHO.
“His decision to sell the Chineese government guidance systems that allowed missles to strike US soil.”
What in the world are you talking about?
Heckler and Sorry . . . read some history, for gosh sake.
A good solid moderate was Senate Majority Leader Tom “Milquetoast” Daschle from a red state. He served in that capacity for most of a decade until he was DEFEATED for re-election.
So much for the power of moderate incumbancy.
FDR, Truman, Kennedy and LBJ were WAY WAY more liberal than today’s Democrats. Remember the “Great Society” program that passed Medicare and Medicaid?
Nope, apparently not . . .
And that’s why today’s Dems are in a semi-permanent state of minority status even though the majority of American lean toward Democratic positions.
Truman said it best when he said, “Carry the battle to them. Don’t let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don’t ever apologize for anything.”
Do you hear anything like that from Hillary or Kerry or Gore or Tom Daschle or Joe “Let me kiss Republican ass, please, sir” Lieberman?
Another good Truman quote–
“Experience has shown how deeply the seeds of war are planted by economic rivalry and social injustice.”
Oh my GOD! Linking economic injustice and WAR! Go back to Russia, you COMMUNIST!
Or consider this “moderate” quote–Richard Nixon [substitute George W. Bush] is a no good, lying bastard. He can lie out of both sides of his mouth at the same time, and if he ever caught himself telling the truth, he’d lie just to keep his hand in.”
What a Nixon-hater! Where’s his message of “moderation”?
“To hell with them. When history is written they will be the sons of bitches – not I.”
This one seems especially relevant today–
“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”
When we get Democrats that start talking like that again, we’ll start winning again, because as Truman pointed out, “when given a choice between a Republican and a Democrat imitating a Republican, voters will not hesitate to vote for the real thing.”
What we’ve had for the last decade and more are Democrats running on the platform of “I’m just like a Republican, except more competent”–Michael Dukkais was a prime example.
And we’ve been losing elections ever since.
“I just tell the truth and they THINK it’s hell!”
“Give ‘em hell” Harry
Sooory, you got any links to back up that diatribe? I suspect some of it is true, but not much.
LH, I suspect part of their lack of nerve stems from the fact that Truman barely won, as did Wilson and Kennedy. However, Roosevelt and Johnson were blowouts. They seem to have forgotten those lessons of history.
Sooory – an awful lot of your list is made up of unproved accusations from the rabid Clinton-haters. So what if the haters impeached Clinton; they never made their case through to conviction.
I am sure if the Dems take the Congress and proceed with impeachment you will be among the first to dismiss that as “Bush-hating”
Rage, you are correct, sir. But then Bush, who took no prisoners, also barely won, and in fact would have lost had the votes been fully recounted in Florida.
Here’s a link to a bootlegged video of Howard Dean speaking in California. He specifically addresses the issue of “no Democratic message.” http://www.calitics.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=319
I have hastily transcribed it below. Remember, you DID NOT SEE THIS on the nightly news. Hmmm . . .
“The core difference between the Republican and the Democratic party is really this—we are the party of ‘our brother’s keepers.’ The Republican party is the party of self-absorption and selfishness. We’re the party that says ‘we’re all in this together.’ When the president’s party attacks Social Security, it is not just a political or ideological difference with a New Deal policy. It is an attack on the idea that not only do I have responsibility for my parents and you have responsibility for yours, but that you are responsible for my parents and I’m responsible for yours. We all have responsiblity for each other. This country cannot be strong until we realize that we are ‘our brother’s keeper.’
“Here’s the message—
First, we’ll put honesty and openness back in our government again. . . . Our ethics bill WILL ban people from sticking middle-of-the-night revisions into bills to stop the giving away of 20 billion dollars to HMO’s and 7 billion dollars in royalties in to oil companies.
“Second, we want a strong national defense, BUT the strong defense has to be based on telling the TRUTH to allies our citizens and our soldiers before we send troops abroad.
“Third, we want American jobs that will stay in America using energy independence as a new industry to replace manufacturing.
“Fourth, we want health care with nobody left out, like 36 other major countries in the world.
“Fifth, we want a public education that is the envy of the world—that creates opportunity and optimism.
“Sixth, we want a retirement system that cannot be stolen by leveraged buyouts and bankruptcy.
That’s it: the environment, security, jobs, national security, public education, honesty and openness in government and health care. I think that’s a pretty good message. And I did it in under a minute.”
Darwin,In November of 1996 Bill Clinton against the recommendations of National Security and Military adivsors, and against US sanctions on military exports to china, granted a waiver allowing the Loral corporation to sell radiation hardened chips necessary for MIRV equipped nuclear missles, at a time the company was already under the chineese espionage investigation by the NSA.Clinton transfered the secret technology to the jurisdiction of the Commerce department which in turn approved it’s sale to china under the guise of a weather satellite component.As a result of Mr Clinton’s actions the Chineese now incorporate the ratiation hardened, encrypted telemetry chips in their new DF-31, DF-31A, DF-5 Mod2 and JL-2 nuclear missles, in exchange for campaign contributions. The money was donated from a variety of sources including convicted Chinagate figures John Huang, Charlie “Yah-Lin” Trie and Johnny Chung, most of which were allowed to flee the country before being apprehended.Hope this helps.
And how is that, “far-left,” Sorry.
I agree it was bad policy, but it’s bad policy because it is exactly something a Republican would do.
Look at how George H. W. Bush protected his family’s massive Chinese investments instead of demanding full US support for the democratic activists massacred at Tienanmen.
He let those people fighting for freedom twist in the wind to make sure business as usual, of which he personally benefitted directly, continued.
Your example doesn’t show anything except a faux-Democrat acting Republican.
No Ben,None of my list is of made up Clinton hating accusations. I did not say Clinton was convicted. I said he was impeached. I didn’t say he was convicted of rape. I said he was accused of it.As far as the number of inditements , convictions and guilty pleas these are all public records.I am not a Bush fan, and frankly a bit sorry I brought the Clinton digression up, however it was necessary to illustrate my point that most Americans have not forgotten the harm done to this country under his watch, and how his and hillary’s continued presence will undermine the democratic efforts to regain control. While they are certainly not the only source of hinderance, they are the poster children and best advertising for the enemies of the democratic party.
Sooory – my point is that the things themselves represent only accusations from Clinton-haters. The impeachment, for example, was only an example of GOP Clinton-hating. And, if the Dems take Congress and impeach Bush you will be screaming “Bush-haters”
What massive Chineese investments of the Bush’s are you referring to LH? I am not aware of them, and as far as the President’s investments, it is my understanding that they are placed in blind trust and managed by a third party by law. I could be wrong but I don’t think that has changed.As far as demanding full US support for the democratic activists massacred at Tienanmen. I do believe it was Bill Clintion that was widely criticized even in the MSM for attending the anniversary celebration of the event as a guest of those that committed the massacre. They used him like a tool to the embrassement of our entire nation. It is this very sort of behaivor that gets the right to thinking, OMG their communists.I am for the record not a faux democrat acting republican. I am a former democrat forced independent and really wishing we could have our party returned to something resembling democratic.
Sooory, your information is questionable enough that you should probably provide links. I’m not calling you a liar, but most of what you’re saying ain’t so. Let’s see some back up. If you don’t know how to include a link in a post, let someone know. We’ll ’splain it for you.
No Ben I would not be screaming Bush-haters as I believe that failure to protect our borders is an impeachable offense. It is clear to me that he has done exactly that.As far as clinton’s impeachment goes I would have agreed with you had it not been for his felony coviction before a judge that he himself appointed. That conviction highlighted and validated every charge against him in the American mindset. A point that I had not intended to bring up, but it again illustrates the degree to which the Clintons are a gift to Republicans that cannot be overcome as long as they remain in the democratic picture.
Heckler, interesting point in your 9:29 post. If, as has happened before, the Lberal Elete go crashing off the left side of the planet, Democrats will once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Winning elections is about how many people you represent. If the Democratic party goes over the left edge demanding ideological purity, they’ll spend another cycle in the swamp.
You need look no further than these threads to see what I’m talking about. The ideologically pure of the party may be prepared to abandon the middle. That will surely lose the election.
Sorry,My question was on Chinese missles hitting U.S. soil. Seems to me that that might be newsworthy. I don’t ever recall hearing that. I, too, ask you to back up these allegations with non-tinfoil hat links.
What is it you need a link to XXX? What isn’t so? Hopefully like everyone else here, I don’t use single sources of information. I also don’t do students homework for them, so please be more specific.
Let me see here…
All I hear from you people here for the past year is that Bush lied when in fact you have no sinlge statement where he actually lied.
Clinton on the other hand lied under oath to a grand jury and was impeached for it and that is just simple republican Clinton hating?
And then you wonder why you have no credability in a discussion.
Darwin,The entire affair was widely publisized for a short period of time but later information was released and some of the actual details were obtained by Judicial Watch under a Freedom of Information request. I don’t know if that is a tin foil hat link in your opinion, however, I don’t think so since they hate bush too.
Can we define our terms a little -”extreme far left” would be a good starting point.
What in Dean’s Democratic Party goals is extreme far left? (See LeftHook’s list above).
“When people get together, miracles happen.”Pete Seeger
I second DD’s questions.
DD,
Extreme far left?
That would be the posters in the thread by Rhonda who took the opportunity to further bash Bush and refuse to admit he might have done something good…
Sorry,I went to the Judicial Watch sitehttp://www.judicialwatch.org/ , searched “chinese missles” and could not find a single story claiming that Chinese missles struck U.S. soil. There were links to stories that accused G.H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan of accepting campaign donations from communist China – in addition to similar accusations against G.W. Bush, Bill & Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry. Seems that they see a lot of evil Chinese everywhere. Guess they’ll have to stop shopping a WalMart, huh?
DD,
Did I miss where anyone claimed that Chinese missles struck US soil?
But, there were indeed a good number of stories about Clinton providing missle guidance system information to the Chinese; also many stories on Chinese spies stealing our missle defense system secrets. If those damn Asians weren’t so smart and hard-working maybe we could keep them out of our science agencies.
“His decision to sell the Chineese government guidance systems that allowed missles to strike US soil.”
Apparently. See YBS’s post at 10:05 a.m.
LeftHook
Tom Daschle was essentially a moderate, but he was pushed by the money powers on the left to support things that his constituants found offensive.
Couple that with the obstuctionist tactics he used in Congress on Judges and legislation on ANYTHING the Left objected to.
So a moderate who was driven by the powers in the party to do things that a moderate wouldnt do gets voted out. Who’s fault is that?
Keep pushing the Moderates out, keep ridiculing the people of faith. Keep undermining national security. Enjoy minority status.
I believe what YBS meant in his 10:05 post was that the Chinese have the ability to hit US soil with a missle, not that they did hit US soil with a missle.
Before I drop it,I guess I am going to assume that YBS’s statement:
“His decision to sell the Chineese government guidance systems that allowed missles to strike US soil.”
was poorly written and not a “made-up” factoid. I think he meant to say something like -”guidance systems that make it POSSIBLE for missles to strike U.S. soil.”
You all seem to think that the next election will be decided on the issues. Unfortunately, the deciding votes will be cast for the candidate with the best hair, just like always!
DD,Why on earth would the Chinese shoot missiles at their best customers?
Heckler,Our posts crossed paths. I think you must be correct.
Back to your take on the “middle” – I think Kerry lost by trying too hard to appeal to the 5% undecided middle voters. He was scared to offend them and in essence did not take a stand on anything much. It was almost like he thought he could sneak into the W.H. by virtue of “not-being” Bush. Your parents sound like mine – except mine are still Democrats. The Democratic party and their principles made it possible for my father, who only had a high school edcuation, to make good money. I will always be grateful for that. Those values are not in play today.
And, Democrats need to not be ashamed of what they stand for. They need to let people know where they stand. The middle class can’t take much more of the status quo, IMHO.
Good point, Jed. The Chinese may be a lot of things. One of them they aren’t, is stupid.
DD
LeftHooks 11:15 post listed five things that the Democrats need to focus on to regain power. If they consentrated on only those things they could probably regain power and keep it for some time.
The problem is they keep pushing the edge on social issues. They keep doing things that lead a lot of Americans to believe that they cant be trusted on national security.
I’ve long felt that if Democrats would just back off on abortion and gun control they would control the House, the Senate, and the White House today.
Heckler
I’ll concede you the fact that if not for the “hot button” issues Dems would doubtless be in control. YOUR side has done a masterful job of using those issues.
…..”back off on abortion and gun cotrol….”
What you mean by “back off” is NO restrictions on guns and banning all abortion.
What your side successfully portrays MY side as is grab all guns and kill all babies.
Would that the American public at large were not so easily duped………
Heckler,
You mean if the Democrats would stop advertising what they actually want to do then they would win?
LOL
JR,
So far you have demonstrated pretty much nothing less than a complete and total distaste for guns and individual gun ownership.
I could be wrong.
Lets see:
JR, do you think that the 2nd amendment of the Constitution gives an individual the right to own a gun?
JR
No. I believe that if 10 years ago the Dems just stopped where we were as far as gun laws go and stood for a ban on third trimester abotions and stood for parental notification for minors they would be in control.
I’m in a bit of a hurry, I hope that makes sense.
I think the Feinsteins and Boxers of the Democratic party have made perfectly clear their agenda.
It is fairly obvious from the actions taking place in San Francisco, California, Washington DC, Virginia, Maryland…
Third trimester abortions are exceedingly rare and usually done only due to grave defects in the fetus. I cannot post a link to prove that but it is true. Third trimester abortions is one of the biggest empty boogeymen the right waves around.
As to guns, I should think it would be at LEAST as hard to get one as it is to get a drivers license. How that makes me a “gun hater” is the spin of folks who want NO restrictions on firearms at all.
Nathan, you have demonstrated elsewhere that you are proud to violate laws as concerns guns. IMO that demonstates poorly for your legally carrying one. It also tends to bring disfavor and mistrust of your cause at large.
Tell ya what Nathan. If you want to strictly adhere to the 2nd Amendment, I say you and everyone else can carry a gun circa 1787. Any other sort of firearm would seem to be outside the scope of the 2nd amendment. I believe that restricts you black powder single shot weapons.
Darwin and Heck,You are both correct that I typed in haste and should have said, “enabled chineese missles to strike US soil.” My apology, and thank you for correcting my mistake. In any event, Judicial Watch is a great source for unraveling the twisted MSM spin we’re flooded with until it becomes a pseudo-fact.
JR,
And freedom of speech doesn’t apply to TV, internet, or anything other than “circa 1787″ either…
I figured you couldn’t answer the question yes or no.
Our political system is corrupt and broken beyond repair. It is too late to save it and we are getting close to the time when we will have to start shooting people, yee haw!
Regime Crisis
by Patrick J. Buchanan
At this writing, France has capitulated to mass demonstrations and canceled a labor law that would have let employers dismiss workers under 26.
For the French, the cave-in is truly bad news. It means the political system is not strong enough to take even modest measures to liberate France from a socialist system that is a freshwater fish in the salt waters of the Global Economy.
If despair and gloom are widespread in France, they are justified. With a birthrate below what is needed to continue as a French nation, its 5-8 million Arab and Islamic immigrants alienated, a limping economy, and no way to cast off socialist shackles, France’s future appears grim.
In America, too, a regime crisis appears at hand.
Millions have massed in cities from Los Angeles to Phoenix to Dallas to Washington to demand that 12 million illegal aliens be granted full rights of U.S. citizens and all talk of defending U.S. borders be halted at once. Republican and Democratic politicians have been rendered speechless by the size of the demonstrations.
But the demonstrations reveal something more unsettlling. That hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens, all subject to deportation, would defiantly march under foreign flags in U.S. cities suggests the government of the United States has lost its moral authority.
For two decades, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush have failed—or rather refused—to do their constitutional duty to defend the states from this invasion. Now the message had gone out to the world. Americans can’t or won’t defend their country. We can walk in and take over. And they are coming in the millions, every year.
And where is our commander in chief? He backs McCain-Kennedy, the bill to grant amnesty to the 12 million and blanket pardons to the corporate chiselers who hired them and passed on to taxpayers the costs of their health, education, and welfare.
This would put the illegals on the road to lifetime benefits from our welfare state and allow U.S. companies to go overseas and hire hundreds of thousands of workers yearly to bring back to replace Americans who balk at working for Third World wages.
This is the opposite of what Americans have told pollsters for 20 years they want. It is the opposite of what Arizonans and Californians have voted for every time they have held a referendum.
According to a new Washington Post-ABC poll, 60 percent of the people now disapprove of Bush’s performance, the strongest repudiation of his leadership since January 2001. And the Republicans who control Congress are running 15 points behind the Democrats. If the elections of 2006 were held today, the GOP would be annihilated.
But what do the Democrats offer us? Censure, taxes—and Cynthia McKinney.
If you think this Congress is an agonizing disappointment, wait for the new House, where chairmanships will be assumed by Barney Frank, John Conyers, and Henry Waxman, with Ways and Means and tax-writing power going to Charlie Rangel. That should be good for a 1000-point plunge in the Dow.
What is the probability of tough legislation to halt the invasion and put the U.S. government back in control of its frontiers? Given the makeup of this Senate—with Democrats virtually united in their resolve to make those 12 million illegal aliens new Democratic voters, and half the GOP terrified of being called “racist” or “xenophobic”—zero.
Indeed, if such a law were passed, it is questionable Bush would enforce it. For he has refused to enforce existing law or defend our southern border and has stated flatly he cannot secure the border unless given an amnesty/guest-worker program to go with it.
And who is the likely replacement for Bush in 2009? Hillary or McCain, both now competing with each other in the generosity of the amnesties they would bestow.
America is facing something of a regime crisis. The president’s poll number are falling not simply because of perceived incompetence—Katrina, Harriet Miers, the Dubai ports deal—but because his policies are failing. His trade policy has created the greatest trade deficits in history and accelerated the death of U.S. manufacturing. His immigration policy has left our borders undefended and millions of illegals marching for their “rights” under foreign flags. His democracy crusade is being ridden to power by anti-Americans from the Middle East to Latin America. His Iraq expedition has given us endless bleedings of blood and money.
What does McCain offer? On trade, immigration, and Iraq, he is 100 percent Bush. If Mexican radical Obrador wins in July and appears headed for the presidency, Americans may be looking around for a General Pershing. At least “Black Jack” understood border control.http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_05_08/buchanan.html
Viva La Revolucion Blanco!!!!!!!!
—–
“Keep pushing the Moderates out, keep ridiculing the people of faith. Keep undermining national security. Enjoy minority status”
Pushing moderates out? Who does that sound like? Undermining national security? Are you talking about things like protesting tens of millions of calls being monitored by Big Brother, in clear violation of a Congressionally passed law and the spirit of the Constitution? Ridiculing people of faith? Are there any winger talking points you don’t blindly swallow?
“The problem is they keep pushing the edge on social issues”
I mean seriously, how can you type that with a straight face? The DEMS are pushing the social issues? You sir, are COMPLETELY DISCONNECTED FROM REALITY, as are the other wingers like Joe Williams (who is a fascist btw) who predicts that Repukes will gain seats this year. Joe, if you truly believe that, I want some of what you’ve had.
But Joe also makes a good point in that most people who vote Republican will continue to vote Republican, regardless of how badly they have screwed the country up. I mean, when you disregard all facts and reality, especially those that do not hew to your opinion and praise that ‘godly’ man Bush it is obvious you are a BRAINWASHED REPUBLICAN. And these are the safest votes of all. MINDLESS FASCIST SWINE.
I can’t wait for you pigs to take your medicine in November.
ll
That’s what I’m talking bout, keep it up. Looks like you’ve got page 1 of the DNC debate book down. Hatefull tone, good, no facts, good, lots of namecalling, good. You pass.
Now get a brain, maybe Dorothy get help you find the Wiz.
I’m serious keep it up, with folks like you driving the DNC Republicans have to be totally FUBAR-ed to lose to you.
Heckler– I’m an Independent because I know that no one party has all the best ideas, people or philosophy. Are you trying to say that you are proud of, and like that your party is doing these days?
I am about 80% satisfied with what the Republicans are doing.
It is better than 10% with the Democrats.
Sorry, I value owning guns and protecting life.
gster
Absolutely not. To much spending, the way they’re handling immigration sucks. Homeland security department is sucking. I could go on, but I won’t. There’s plenty of people on this forum to badmouth Republicans.
But I thank God every day that we don’t have Al Gore or John Kerry as president and as spineless as they are at times I’d rather have Republicans in control than Democrats.
Nathan–
How do you respond to the fact that there was almost twice as many abortions when abortion was illegal than there are now?
Heckler,
That was a very good answer. I don’t necessarily agree with your portrayal of Gore or Kerry simply because I can’t imagine someone that reaches that level, not having been tested well along the way , and having a spine thru necessity.Even people I really don’t like, for whatever reason, I don’t think of them in those terms, but that’s probably just me.
Good post, LL.
You’ve got Heckler screaming that nobody knows what the Democrats stand for and you’ve got Nathan tell us he can read Boxer and Pelosi’s mind–he knows their agenda.
I get the feeling he hasn’t listened to either one of them for five minutes.
I say that because I watch a lot of news and they hardly ever get a chance to air their side. John McCain on the hand is an entirely different story.
The polls are showing that about a quarter to a third of Americans are going to stand by Bush no matter what. They’re the one or two issue Americans of which Nathan is a perfect example–pro guns and pro birth. The rest of the country can go to hell but as long has he can cuddle his warm gun and tell women what to do, he’s a happy camper.
These folks are beyond reason and there’s no use wasting your breath on them.
Nathan is still asking with those big sad eyes, “when did our Commander in Chief ever lie?” There’s no point in dignifying that with a response–just google “Bush” and “lie” and your computer will light up like a pinball machine.
Anybody capable of asking that question is so deep into cult worship that it’s just sad really.
Fortunately, there’s still the 70 to 75 percent of Americans–the non-idiots–who have just had enough.
BTW, Sorry, I’m not going to do your research for you. Google it yourself. HW watched tens of thousands of Chinese gather in Tienanmen Square demanding freedom, and he did nothing. He didn’t even pay them lip-service.
Even if I were wrong about the Chinese investments, which I’m not, ignoring the Chinese freedom fighters IN ITSELF is despicable, especially given that GW has us in never-ending-war for “freedom.”
Okay, okay . . . You’llbeSorry, I took pity on you–
Here’s the story that you didn’t read in the “liberal” mainstream media:
Bush brother Prescott flies to Shanghai after the Tiananmen Square massacre to close a deal for an $18 million resort there, despite his brother’s ban on high-level Chinese contacts. Prescott says, “We aren’t a bunch of carrion birds coming in to pick the carcass. But there are big opportunities in China, and America can’t afford to be shut out.”http://www.bushwatch.com/family.htm
Neil Bush also had dealings with the Chinese, which is why they sent hookers up to his room in Hong Kong.
Too bad about the herpes, dude. He should have used a condom . . . but then we all know where the Bush’s stand on condoms, hehehehe . . .
The Chinese showered Neil Bush (the president’s baby brother)with cash and prostitutes (but I guess not the ones his older brother is protecting).
This info was revealed at Neil’s divorce hearing — which got very ugly – but was ignored by the “liberal” MSM.
When asked if he thought it was strange that the Chinese would supply him with prostitutes, Neil said:”Yes, I thought it was rather unusual.” Almost as much of a word-smith as his oldest brother.:-)
I agree with some of the previous posters who said we need to get rid of Roberts and Brownback!! If we got rid of these fools our states respect level would skyrocket.
While were at it, lets get rid of Tihart and Ryun. Moran is not bad, and it wouldnt hurt to keep him around. He still votes the party line, but he keeps his mouth shut.
Where are the rats still on the bush ship? Looks like the WE editors are adding a new shill for the family values crowd. Wonder what he will have to say about this?
“Fifty percent said Democrats came closer than Republicans to sharing their moral values, compared with 37 percent who said Republicans shared their values.
A majority said Republican members of Congress were more likely to be financially corrupt than Democratic members of Congress, suggesting that Democrats may be making headway in their efforts to portray Republicans as having created a “culture of corruption” in Washington.
By better than two to one, Democrats were seen as having more new ideas than Republicans.”
You’re right LH that is the story I missed. Maybe if they removed the reference to Bushsuckz.com and offered it up to the NY Times, some of it could find it’s way into their stuff for a small fee.BTW, is maggotpunks.com your site? Also unique and interesting, but I think I would refrain from making Mental Health reform part of my platform, were I you. You know, careful for what you wish for and all. Thanks for the laughs and the memories of my own batshit crazy days.—–
My big money is on Bush staing in for another life term. Last week he just won all of us BIG TAX BREAKS on interest and dividend incomes. We will all save BILLIONS! Bush is BRILLIANT! We need more republican leadership! Then we won’t have to pay any income tax for interest and dividend income. The dumb low rent slobs who work 9 to 5 can pay all the taxes for all of us brilliant ones. I really feel for the CEO’s because a little of their really huge incomes would have a small tax increase. Thats ok because those big guys have a heck of a lot of interest and dividend income they would no longer have to pay ANY tax on. It’s party time in the USA. Everybody vote republican and maybe someday you too can own an oil company or be a billionaire.
Don The TrumpLiving Big GOP all the way baby!
YouAreSorry,
Heh, way to stick with the right-wing script: when the facts run counter to your claim and you’re caught dead to rights, don’t admit you were wrong, slime the source.
Sliming links is an especially notorious method the right-wing has used for years. The NEA (teacher’s union) linked to a national school-psychologist’s site after 9-11. That site linked to another that expressed the need to understand one’s enemies.
Rush Limbaugh picked up on this and accused the NEA of “supporting terrorism.”
That’s what you people do, isn’t it?
BTW, maggot-punks is not “my” website. I just link to it.
Batshit crazy, indeed . . .
I’ll assume that since you didn’t actually REFUTE Prescott Bush’s 18 million dollar resort deal pending during H.W.’s deafening silence on Tiananmen, you agree that it’s scandalous.
But don’t let facts influence your opinion of the Bushs’. You can’t be a right-winger if you start letting reality influence your beliefs.
Oh my gosh, now I’m linking to another site that’s not mine.
LH, I am sorry that you mistakenly think I disregarded your information based it’s substance. I disregareded it because you failed to site a credible source of information.The truth is, I also subscribe to reliable sources of information and do not like wasting my time being sent to sites that you describe as “Tin Foil Hat” sites.I find it amazing that you demand reliable, independent sources of information to support the claims of those you disagree with, but when you want to site a reference, it is perfectly credible to have agenda based logo’s pasted on it.The truth is, whether or not you information is correct is irrevelant. It comes from a site that has a clear agenda, and cannot be considered a reliable source by any definition of the word.Please find a reference to your information that comes from a credible source and I or anyone else would probably find it a worthy read.Personally, I’d think you would want to know you were dealing with good information when you put it out, but that has become something of an inconvience these days. Much easier to make the claim then start ranting and whining when someone doesn’t take the bait.
Okay, fair enough, Sooory.
But if the evidence came from a reputable mainstream source, would you agree that it’s a scandalous conflict-of-interest for the Bush family?
I’m not going to track this down for you, if you’re going to just play some semantic game after I find it.
So Clinton sold techology to China they already make EVERTHING we buy now anyways thanks to Nixon. last I checked we dont any any beef with China they are largest trading partner. But how about the Bush family links to the Bin Laden family? Or allowing the Bin Laden family to leave the US right after 9/11? Or the that Rumsfield sold weapons of Mass Destruction to Iraq. Or Oliver North selling weapons to terrorist in Iran. and so on.
If there’s money to be made, the Bush family will make it–they were bankers to the Nazis.
BTW, Sooory, it’s a YES or NO question.
So which is it, YES or NO?
LH, I already said, if it comes from a credible source I and most everyone else would consider it an interesting read. I’m not paticularly fond of Bush or most of his policies, but they are what I expect as he is a Republican. My problem with Clinton however runs much deeper as he was supposed to be on my side from the beginning and democrats are still paying the price, because he simply will not go away.
TrueBlue,What is the question? All I see is a statement.
Trying to get right-wingers to answer a yes or no question is like pulling teeth.
Here it is again–
“But if the evidence came from a reputable mainstream source, would you agree that it’s a scandalous conflict-of-interest for the Bush family [because HW did essentially nothing about freedom in China while his family makes money]?”
Sooory–How’s the Associate Press for ya?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2002/02/19/usat-prescott-bush.htm
President’s uncle shares Bush family ties to China
By Debbie Howlett, USA TODAYAPPrescott BushCHICAGO — When President Bush arrives in Beijing on Thursday, he’ll embrace a policy that’s something of a family tradition.
Bush’s approach centers on promoting U.S.-China economic ties. That’s a course favored not only by his father, the first President Bush, but also by his uncle, Prescott Bush Jr., a longtime acquaintance of Chinese President Jiang Zemin.
The Bush family’s ties to China go back to 1974, when President Nixon named George Bush ambassador to China. The college-age George W. Bush spent two months in China visiting his parents during his father’s two-year stint.
Seven years after his brother left the ambassadorial post, Prescott Bush made his first trip to China. He later joined with Japanese partners in 1988 to build a golf course in Shanghai, the first in China. He met Jiang, who was then the mayor of Shanghai.
The Prescott Bush file• Age: 79. Born Aug. 10, 1922.
• Education: Yale University.
• Background: Chairman, U.S.-China Chamber of Commerce; president, Prescott Bush Resources.
• Politics: Unsuccessfully challenged U.S. Sen. Lowell Weicker in Connecticut’s Republican primary election in 1982 for the seat once held by his father.
• Family: The oldest of five children of Sen. Prescott Bush and Dorothy Walker Bush. Lives with wife, Beth, in Greenwich, Conn. Two grown children.
Source: USA TODAY researchPrescott Bush, now 79, also developed a close working relationship with Rong Yiren, a former trade minister and vice president, who in 1993 introduced Bush to a group of Chinese business leaders as “an old friend.” In 2000, Forbes publications reported that Rong, who has retired from government, was the richest man in China.
The president’s uncle concedes that he sometimes relied on his name to open doors, but he says any deals he made were the result of his own hard work.
“You can get a meeting because of it, you can meet a lot of people because of it,” he said in a recent interview in Chicago, where the U.S.-China Chamber of Commerce has its headquarters. “But I don’t get a lot of business because my nephew is president or my brother was president.”
Some experts argue otherwise. A name is not just helpful, it’s essential, says Nick Larty, a professor of international relations at George Washington University in Washington, D.C.: “Who you get access to in China is pretty much a function of how important you are.”
Along with access, the family name has also brought scrutiny to Prescott Bush’s deals:
He was criticized in 1989 for visiting China to meet with business and government leaders just three months after the Tiananmen Square massacre, in which army troops fired at pro-democracy demonstrators.His Shanghai partnership with the Japanese firm Aoki in 1988 proved embarrassing when revelations surfaced that Aoki at the same time was allegedly trying to get business contracts by bribing Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega, whom the first President Bush later ousted from power.His connections to an American firm, Asset Management, came into question in 1989, when the company was the only U.S. firm able to skirt U.S. sanctions and import communications satellites into China.When Asset Management went bankrupt later that year, Bush’s deal to arrange a buyout through West Tsusho, a Japanese investment firm, raised eyebrows. Newspapers reported that Japanese police were investigating West Tsusho’s alleged ties to organized crime.Bush declines to discuss those controversies. “That’s old news. It’s in the past,” he says.
Last year, he opened the U.S.-China Chamber of Commerce offices in Chicago. The membership roster includes United Airlines, American Express, McDonald’s, Ford and Arthur Andersen, the beleaguered company that audited Enron’s books.
Bush says opportunities abound now that the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis is in the past: “The Chinese are very much interested in getting foreign capital in. They desperately need the jobs.”
Last fall, Bush hosted a well-attended trade conference in Chicago at which U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick gave the keynote address. At a dinner he sponsored last month at the Yale Club in New York, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Negroponte, was guest of honor.
Perhaps the most intriguing question about Bush’s China connections is whether he played a role in ending a U.S.-China standoff in April, when a Chinese fighter jet collided with a U.S. Navy surveillance plane over the South China Sea. The Chinese pilot was killed, and the U.S. plane made an emergency landing on Hainan island, where 24 U.S. crewmembers were held for 11 days.
The president’s uncle traveled to China just hours after news of the incident broke. He flew aboard United’s inaugural flight from Chicago to Beijing. Other dignitaries on the largely ceremonial flight stayed a few days, but Bush didn’t return home for two weeks. Moreover, U.S. Ambassador Joseph Prueher met Bush — but not the rest of the group.
Prueher says their meeting was simply a social call.
“I might have joined him for a cup of tea or a Coke — maybe we had a beer, I don’t recall,” says Prueher, who left his post in June. “We spent an hour chatting.”
Bush denies any involvement in the diplomatic settlement that ended the crisis.
“I couldn’t possibly do something like that,” he says. “It would be very embarrassing for the president if it was found out that I was going to see my friends when he was trying to work things out.”
The standoff ended when Prueher sent Jiang a carefully worded letter of regret over the incident. The next day, the U.S. crew was permitted to leave. Bush left a day later.
Doing business with blood-thirsty dictators . . . a way of life for generations of Bushs’ . . .
I’ll give you this one LH, half your claim may have some merit. Sounds pretty shameful to me, and right in line with the the longstanding tradition of elitiest blue bloods that have had a lock on this country for many decades. Ol Prescott is certainly a scoundrel, no doubt about it.Kind of reminds me of Ted Kennedy’s dad the bootlegger/ambassador/nazi cheerleader.
Personally, I think they are all related somewhere down the line. That might explain why George the first and Bill Clinton got along so famously.
Agreed.
Sweetheart deals and cronyism are un-American whether Repub or Dem.