Comments Posted By retire05
Displaying 171 To 180 Of 231 Comments
Tom Kelly sings McChachu's praises. Well, Tom, tell that to the families of over 1,700 American POWs left in Vietnam. Explain to them how he is so strong on saving us money, how his traditional values on marriage allowed him to walk out on the wife that waited for his all those years he was a guest of the NVC at the Hanoi Hilton and who never stopped fighting to get him returned. Tell them your story.
Then explain to me, how a man who has consistantly fought his own party and joined the left side of the aisle will appoint constructionist judges to the SCOTUS. Explain to me how we could be drilling in ANWAR if it hadn't failed by one vote, McCain's vote. Explain to me how, a man who has been in D.C. for so long didn't manage to cut much pork from the bills presented but damn sure managed to get McCain/Feingold through that gave us George Soros and the 527s.I will be waiting.
Comment Posted By retire05 On 20.01.2008 @ 17:21
I read (can't remember where) that often Thompson will take a chair, sit down in front of the crowd and unlike the other candidates who stand above the crowd, lean back on the back two legs of the chair and have a "conversation" with the audience.
What other popular president treated voters like friends? FDR with his "fireside chats".Now Fred's tactic of being acessible to the populace may not play well in the heady north, but I can tell you, it will in the south. Just take a look at Mitt the last two days, no jacket, no tie, shirt collar button undone. The "everyman" image. Only Fred Thompson is the "everyman". Why is that? He is out of the northern states and in South Carolina and Nevada, they will expect him to represent them by being one of them.
The American voter has suffered from the same "dumbing down" process that our schools have. The Nikki Hilton, Brittany Spears glitter mentality has prevailed and voters want glitz, not common sense. Hell, you can sell anything to anyone if you wrap it up in pretty paper.
Even if Fred loses N.C., he must go on. He will gain delegates in Texas whose first Republican straw poll selected Duncan Hunter, another true conservative. Hunter needs to throw in the towel and come out for Fred in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Mississippi and all points west.
Comment Posted By retire05 On 19.01.2008 @ 00:24
OF "GOD'S STANDARDS" AND CONSERVATISM
Sidney, sorry, but Rick is right on this; Huckabee is more Elmer Gantry than Ronald Reagan. And I for one, don't need a man who is not "all inclusive" as president. I don't like Huckabee and I would lay 10 to one odds that in his heart he is much like the extremists who can't believe that I am a Catholic since it is common knowledge that all Catholics are are idol worship fanatics. That, in some, is the Bible Belt attitude.
Huckabee's arrogance, to presume to know what God wants, is beyond the pale. Does that mean that all the Jews in the United States are just not following "God's" laws because they don't see religion the same way Huckabee does?Our Founding Fathers worked very hard to make sure that no one religion (be it Baptist, Catholic, Quaker, et al)took dominence over any other religion. The idea was to allow each man his personal beliefs without persecution. Not to make sure that we all think the same way by Constitutional fiat.
Two things are evident: Huckabee is spliting the Republican vote and knows it. He is playing to the Christians who have felt that their faith has been under constant attack and he out to level the playing field; secondly, Huckabee is no liberal so the only card he has is the religion card.
His message is clear; he is more Christian that any other Republican candidate, especially Romney. That in my book, makes him less Christian. He is not what this nation needs.
My grandmother taught me that there are three things you don't discuss in public; politics, sex and religion.
Mr. Huckabee could simply state that his religion is an important factor in his life, but like JFK, he will be a President to those of all faiths. That is not the message he is putting out. He is basically saying "you have been disenfranchised and I will change that".
Comment Posted By retire05 On 16.01.2008 @ 20:16
McCAIN NOW CROWNED "MR. INEVITABLE"
Mr. Inevitable by whose standards? You would think that Iowa, Michigan, South Carolina and New Hampshire are the end all to the Republican races and oh, well, those pesky little states like Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma et al, really don't count. Let's pick our nominee by just four states.
The only people pushing McCain as the inevitable chosen one is the media. They want him to run against Obama; the old man v. the kid. Now who in the world would chose the old man of the sea when you can have the new kid on the block? Even Fox News pushes McCain. Fred Barnes being the worst offender.
And how much do we hear about Fred who is considered by the media to be lazy (misjudging his laid back southerness to being lazy) but who is working his tail off and raking in the donations so fast they can't keep up with them? Fred doesn't kiss the backside of the media so he, to them, is a non-item.
So all we hear about is John Kerry's new best friend (McCain) and Elmer Gantry (Huckabee) and a few snipits about Romney who should be getting more credit and less flack.
What is the choice with Independents? A Democratic socialist (Hillary or Obama) or a Repubican socialist (McCain or Huckabee)? Now we have Joe Liberman (who votes strictly along liberal lines except for the war on terror) and Lindsey Grahamnesty stumping for McCain. That should tell voters all they need to know but alas, they would rather have the media tell them who will be the next CIC. It is so much easier than really doing some research on these men's records, isn't it?
Comment Posted By retire05 On 15.01.2008 @ 15:29
#10, are you totally clueless? What does Huckabee talk about ad nauseum? His "Christianity". He doesn't have to mention evangelicals. He is singing to the choir and he knows it. End of story. But then, even that is not enough to turn me against him. But the fact that he allowed northwest Arkansas to turn into Little Mexico is. The fact that although he lowered taxes, his tax hikes were more than double the savings. The fact that he has taken campaign funds from Tyson Foods, who did it best to displace American workers, absolutely turns my stomach.
You think because we don't really appreciate Huckabee's Bible thumping when he is running for President and not Pastor makes us bigots? Wow! You have really set the bar low, haven't you?
Hell, man, I'd have more faith in Elmer Gantry.
Comment Posted By retire05 On 13.01.2008 @ 20:36
Rick, I consider myself a strong Christian. But I am a Catholic and my faith has been beat around the head and ears as long as I can remember. So if someone is questioning a person's faith, so be it. Join the club.
But I also don't like someone who goes around with a sign on their neck that says "I am a Christian, so vote for me." I have to wonder that if Huck is such a strong Baptist, and the Baptist don't always agree with the Catholics (or Methodists or Lutherns or Church of Christ fellows) will Huck base his presidency on his faith, or mine?
Personally, I think Huck's tactics are "I'm not a Morman" without really coming out an saying it.
I live in the Bible Belt and don't be fooled by a few religious radicals in the party. They are the exception, not the rule. Sure we believe in prayer (anything that might help one's situation) but we also believe that the Founding Father's had it right. We can be pro-life without being Bible thumpers. As a matter of fact, in our county GOP, I have no idea the faith of my fellow conservatives unless I happen to see them [at my] church.
Maybe it is time to start asking the candidates (like Huckabuck and McCain) some hard questions that so far are not being asked. Perhaps McCain would like to explain how he is pro-life but also supports embryonic stem cell research, why he voted against drilling in ANWAR (according to Rick Santorum it was lost by one vote, McCain's), why he is still against tax cuts for all Americans and does he feel he really messed up on the greatest insult to the First Amendement, the McCain/Feingold bill that gave us the George Soros type 527's? Or maybe Huck would like to answer for his ties to Tyson Foods that is due to go into court in March for displacing American workers by replacing them with illegals from Mexico or why northwest Arkansas is seeing such a surge of illegals from Mexico that Spanish is now, almost, the regional language. Or how much money Tyson had donated to his campaign (OpenSecrets shows $8,000.00) while they continue to displace the American workers whose jobs he claims to want to protect or why he campaigned for Democrats in Arkansas. In my eyes, Huckabee is a charletan that is another Jimmah Carter with a "R" behind his name.
If it is Huck's desire to split the GOP between evangelicals and those who are just socially conservative, you would think that he would understand that he will only hand the election to Hillary, or even worse, Obama. Apparently not, so sorry, I don't want a candidate that cares more for his own interests than the interests of conservatives, themselves. And that's how I see both him and McCain.
Comment Posted By retire05 On 13.01.2008 @ 16:19
COULD CONSERVATIVES WORK WITH A PRESIDENT OBAMA?
Allahpundittredex, in case you haven't noticed, the president doesn't run the Congress or the Senate. Those, currently, are under the controll of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and I see no indication they are willing to work with Republicans in any way, shape or form.
Comment Posted By retire05 On 8.01.2008 @ 13:33
Sorry, but all this "meet and greet in the middle" Repubican caving is just that; moderation that will sell our nation to the collectivists in the Democratic Party. Why would Obama, with a majority in the Congress and a small majority in the Senate even need to work with Republicans? The Democrats goals are not to get along, they are to get their agendas passed. No need to get Republican cooperation when they are the majority.
We hear how we need another Reagan. I don't think Reagan would be saying "we just all need to get along". Sorry, we need to work our butts off to make sure that the Demcorats don't take possession of the Oval Office. Just ask your liberal friends if they are happy that the split-to-the-left SCOTUS made them happy when they decided that companies could end a retiree's health benefits when they reach the age to be on Medicare. Those are benefits that unions worked for and the SCOTUS just said "doesn't matter" and ruled in favor of corporations.
Be careful what you wish for, you just may get it.
Comment Posted By retire05 On 7.01.2008 @ 22:06
Sorry, I have to disagree with you. This is like saying that if we are going to get the living hell kicked out of us, we should try to convince the guy doing the kicking to wear softer shoes.
I'm sorry, I will never be able to work with anyone who says he believes in "age-appropriate" sex education for kindergartners and thinks that if a baby winds up being born alive after the mother tries to abort it that it is OK to let it die since it is her choice, and stand even NARAL couldn't accept. I also think there would not be much room for compromise with a guy who claims that America has come a long way which permits someone like him (half black) to run for POTUS but btw, do you white guys remember Selma? That kind of change will take place when Dr. Bill Cosby has a greater voice than Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
I don't want a "new" America, I want the America designed by Franklin, Adams, Madison, Jefferson and the rest of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. I don't want a "living" ever changing Constitution, depending on the whims of activist judges (which Obama will probably be able to put two on the SCOTUS), I want a government that follows the Constitution that was written so that every man, woman and child over the age of 12 could understand it whether they could read or not. I don't want to be taxed by a government that thinks it knows what to do with my paycheck better than I do so they can try to make someone happy, I want everyone to be able to persue happiness, not give them a guarantee.
Yes, his foreign policy instincts are frightening, and remember he will be the CIC. But in the end, our domestic policy won't matter a hill of beans if we have multiple 9-11's all over this nation. The concern about staying alive will always trump the concern for socialized health care.
So if you want to accept anything, accept that as conservatives we must work harder than we ever have to make sure that no Democratic reaches the Oval Office as POTUS on January 20, 2008. You want a hint of what's to come if that happens? Take a look at the stock market the day after the Iowa caucuses. And don't try to say that it was due to one guy who purchased a block of oil at $100. only to watch oil prices fall after that. It wasn't.
After watching politics for 45 years, having traded parties after Jimmy Carter and seeing how we have come from the financial security of the 50's, I can see where we have landed; and it ain't purty. If you can't see that we are heading for a government based on collectivism and that the current crop of Democrats would not only give it a push but a hard kick toward the finish line, I guess all this opining of mine has just been wasted effort.
Comment Posted By retire05 On 6.01.2008 @ 20:01
McCAIN TO BE BLINDSIDED IN NEW HAMPSHIRE ON MONDAY? (MAYBE NOT: SEE UPDATE)
funky chicken, are you saying that the families of those who never were returned at "troofers"? How dim can you be.
We lost a home boy in Vietnam. His body was returned five years ago. His family never gave up hope that he would come home although they knew it would be in a flag draped box.
I can tell you from the sister of the Marine who finally came home, that she tried to meet with John McCain about trying to find her brother and at least bring him home to be buried in the family plot. MCCAIN REFUSED TO MEET WITH HER. Sam Johnson finally helped her and six months later, Lt. Marine was brought home.
So a woman who just wants her brother found and returned to his native soil is now a troofer?Can you explain Sydney Schanberg's searing article? Are you saying he was lying? That all the facts he presented are dishonest?
I see you don't address the fact that McCain also refused to meet with the Border Patrol in his own state. Why? When he was pushing his McCain/Kennedy Shamnesty Act was he afraid to take the heat that he would have felt from the agents on the front lines?
You also seem to have no problem that McCain doesn't want to cut your taxes. Fine. I have an offer for you. Pay mine and you can feel really good about helping another American.
Comment Posted By retire05 On 3.01.2008 @ 15:11
