(Page 3 of 9)
Eugene Methvin’s article made me see red; and his not so subtle allusion to Rush as a Taliban is just what conservatives have come to expect from our oh-so-superior moderate elites in the Republican Party. What’s the difference between a liberal and a moderate Republican? When a liberal proposes some vast program to change American society and gets only half of what he wants in a compromise the cause of liberalism advances. When a moderate Republican compromises (and still gives the liberal half of what he wants) we are told by the Republican elites that it is a great victory because the left only got half; in any event the cause of liberalism still advances. Come to think of it, that is exactly what we were told when the Senate Republicans rolled over on Ruth Bader Ginsburg; and that’s exactly what I expect to hear during a McCain presidency â€” liberal appointments are the best that we can hope to achieve.p>This is not so much about McCain as it is about the Republican Party telling us to hold our noses yet again and vote for another moderate because “where else are you going to go?” Well it is not going to fly this time. We don’t have to go anywhere. I, for one, will go to the polls in November and vote for all other offices except the president. If enough likeminded people do the same the disparity in the numbers will be unmistakable, McCain will be defeated and the Party will get the message. We do not intend to be like Blacks in the Democratic Party, our vote taken for granted. Is it possible that Black Democrats will have a similar awakening should Obama not get the nomination. Wouldn’t that dual coincidence be something? br> — Terry Terrance br> Culpeper, Virginia /p> p> BETTER THAN REAGAN br> Re: Philip Klein’s Partying Like it’s 2004 : /p>
It is amazing to see members of the conservative media trying to saddle George W. Bush with the effects of their childlike behavior. When conservative pundits and the alternative media began their hysterical rant against Harriet Miers and DPW they were laying the foundation for today’s perceived “problems.” Then in an attempt to prove their “independence” they jumped on the liberal media bandwagon blaming President Bush for Louisiana Democrats inept handling of the post-Katrina flooding (that they failed then and now to actually investigate the facts damns them even further as liberal stooges). Things got even worse when invoking the name of “Open Borders” Ronald Reagan, who granted amnesty and citizenship to millions of illegal aliens, they scuttled the President’s comprehensive immigration reform without a plausible and fiscally sound alternative — deportation based on attacks leveled at the former GOP Congress would be a no go for fiscal conservatives worried about Federal spending.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?