Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Bush and his ilk have no guiding principles
Published on June 1, 2007 By Draginol In Republican

Peggy Noonan, one of my heroes, has an outstanding column in today's Wallstreet Journal about George W. Bush and how he has torn the Republican party asunder.

It has always amazed me to see Bush haters trying to paint Bush as a "typical" Republican or "typical" conservative. He is neither.

His out of control spending, his preference for loyalty over competency, his incompotent handling of Iraq, his left-of center views on federal education, immigration, and even welfare make him not a Republican or a Democrat but some sort of bizarro President.

It's as if "Bob down the street" somehow got elected President. Bob, who knows little on politics, has little interest in it, gathers about him his Sunday afternoon Football buddies to hang with him and set out policy based on their "gut".

Except I suspect Bob wouldn't be stupid enough to call the base of his support unpatriotic as Bush did yesterday.  Only in Bush's world would those who are against lawbreaking considered unpatriotic.

Check out Peggy's column below. It is well worth the read.

 


Comments (Page 4)
on Jun 08, 2007
Sorry, I missed your slam on William Jefferson the day he was indicted on 16 counts. Maybe you could link to it.


i slammed jefferson before he was indicted...and others in the same article...i also gave credit where due,,,,from the article...

Last year, after allegations and 90,000 of marked bills in his freezer came to light, Jefferson was rightfully kicked off the Ways and Means committee. Unfortunately, the people of New Orleans sent this soon to be felon back to Washington. Most of the nation cited corruption as a major reason for change in Washington. Obviously, the voters who sent MR Jefferson back to D.C. weren't amongst them.

In his case, Speaker Pelosi had a grand opportunity to stand up for the Americans who are sick of the blatant corruption in Washington. Instead, she decided to play "business as usual" as Congressman Jefferson got comfortorble in his committee chair.

On one hand, I applaud the Speaker for her management and success of their "1st 100 hours" in getting thru all the legislation they promised. They certainly have been more effective and victorious than over in Harry Reid's Senate, who seems stalled at the starting line.

On the other hand there's gross cronyism and old school politics in moves like this. There's also her inability to actually make good on the promise of a 5 day house workweek. So far, they've only had one, and this week is another 3 day week.


here's your link...


WWW Link
on Jun 08, 2007
Not really. You shouldn't hold yourself and drmiler to a different standard, which is exactly what your doublespeak reply #46 is. Doublespeak.

You can't say that you are allowed to not be balanced and fair, just because you say you're a conservative, but Sean has to be balanced and fair because he doesn't say he's a conservative.

It's that double standard that keeps me out of the political forums usually. If someone agrees with you, they can spread all the crap they want. The minute someone doesn't agree, you make up some phooey about why their viewpoint is wrong.

I'm just sick and tired of your double standards.


thank you san. appreciate that. and coming from someone who doesn't always agree with me, from what i see, it means even more.

but i've come to accept that double standard. as frustrating as it can be sometimes.
on Jun 08, 2007
i am sorry but Sean threatened to have me kicked off of here once because i refused to agree with him on one of his threads. he was attacking bush for something and when i accused the other side of doing the something he told me it wasn't important because he wasn't talking about the other side and if i didn't agree with him he would have be blackballed from the forum all together

so yes Sean is a democrat no matter what he says he is and he is into censorship when someone disagrees with him
on Jun 09, 2007
Don't worry about it, danielost. He has no such power or authority here. In addition, the blacklist feature is broken, so the worst he can do to you is prevent you from commenting on his blog, but you can still comment on ANYTHING that's posted to the forums. He certainly can't blacklist you from anyone else's threads.


the whole point is that he wanted to shut someone up who didn't agree with him

and he wonders why i included him in that illigel thread of mine(not that i knew i was doing anything wrong at the time)
on Jun 09, 2007
the whole point is that he wanted to shut someone up who didn't agree with him


no dan,,,i simply requested that you stick to a subject and not repeat moronic crap over and over. and you were never threatended in any way. you made that up when i asked you to try to not be an idiot in much more diplomatic language than i'm using here. the fact is it is more annoying to put up with your lack of grasp of the english language than anything you have to say. the fact is you haven't made hardly any decent points since arriving. the fact is that all you do is spew the parroted talking points of the neoconservatives without any real understanding of what you are saying...and it's obvious.

He's just a dick. Pay him no mind.


the obsession continues...  
on Jun 09, 2007
you were never threatended in any way. you made that up


do i have to go through all of these feeds just to get the quote where you threatened to have me blacklisted

and i was on subject i was just including the other side of the show

on Jun 09, 2007
"i gave her credit for her "1st 100 hours" deal...they did what they said, can't blast her for that, regardless of my views on the individual pieces of legislation."


Heh, well, if you live in such a mythological world to believe that, there's not much hope in reasoning with you. It goes to show that all the Dems have to do is propose legislation or pass "preliminary versions" of legislation that was never intended to survive, and their drones will forgive most anything. No one ever checks back to see if their lauded "effort" was finalized.

They blew the first 100 hours before it even started, by ignoring the 9/11 commission's recommendation on the intelligence committee. They blew the first 100 hours when they took legislators that were already CAUGHT being corrupt, and placed them in key ethics positions to "drain the swamp". The first 100 hours was a joke promise before they ever sat down and started drafting meaningless legislation.

And before you start posting all the house bills that I have seen over and over as proof of this 100 hours crap, save us some time and check to see which ones ever became law, and which that became law actually accomplished what it was set out to do.



on Jun 10, 2007
Except for the part where you and Guy only "holler" about the one side, leaving the other side in beautiful effigy, without apparent blemish.

Pot, meet the kettle.


Then you really don't pay attention to what I do write. Because I have slammed the republicans too. "Especially" over the dumb-assed immigration bill. And yes that includes Bush with the rest of the dumb-asses.
on Jun 10, 2007
Then you really don't pay attention to what I do write. Because I have slammed the republicans too. "Especially" over the dumb-assed immigration bill. And yes that includes Bush with the rest of the dumb-asses.


this has become the neocon battle-cry...a way to appear "independent" after 6+ years of walking in lock step and being a rubber stamp. it's not like this is some new stance by the president. before the 2000 election, then candidate bush said this....

From a Speech in Washington, D.C. Jun 26, 2000...

Latinos come to the US to seek the same dreams that have inspired millions of others: they want a better life for their children. Family values do not stop at the Rio Grande. Latinos enrich our country with faith in God, a strong ethic of work, community & responsibility. We can all learn from the strength, solidarity, & values of Latinos. Immigration is not a problem to be solved, it is the sign of a successful nation. New Americans are to be welcomed as neighbors and not to be feared as strangers.

and on dec 9th of 99, the candidate said this...

I believe it is far more compassionate to turn away people at the border than to attempt to find and arrest them once they are living in our country illegally.

and before the people re-elected him again in 2004, his stance had not changed...from january 2004...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush will outline an immigration reform proposal Wednesday that would allow workers in the United States illegally to join a new temporary worker program and not lose their jobs, administration officials said.

and ya'll re-elected him. it's not like bush sprung this on everyone after the 2004 election. he's had the same stance since he was a candidate. people seem to forget that this is a family thing for him, and the party was onboard when it was sold as a way to get votes from those pesky ol' democrats....from Time Magazine in 2000...

Monday, Jun. 19, 2000 By JAMES CARNEY AND JOHN F. DICKERSON/WASHINGTON

George Bush--all three generations of him--wants to woo Hispanic voters. Scarcely a week goes by when the Texas Governor--George W.--isn't hola-ing and comos estas-ing his way through a Hispanic community center or a classroom filled with Hispanic children. And late last week in New York City, his campaign released its first television ads of the general election--ads starring GEORGE P. BUSH, the candidate's charismatic 23-year-old Mexican-American nephew, in a direct pitch to New York's Puerto Rican voting bloc. The star turn will not be his last. "You're going to be seeing a lot more of him," beams a campaign adviser.

Even George H.W. Bush--the patriarch of the namesakes--is getting into the swing of things. Sources tell TIME that the former President, who once famously referred to his Mexican-American grandchildren, including George P., as "the little brown ones," recently urged his son's campaign to hold a national Hispanic event aimed at luring Hispanics away from the Democrats.


on Jun 10, 2007
oh, and btw,,,miler and the rest of the neocon pundits didn't say a word about immigration until after the 2004 election. i believe miler's first entry into the battle was "conveniently" at the same time the other pundits started showing their feigned "independence" in january of 2005.
on Jun 10, 2007
i guess you haven't seen my posts on the fact that i am against homeland security because it takes away to many rights of course taking away one right is too many.


and this is the reason i am so against the democrats they want to remove all rights except for themselves.

lets take that crap at the beginning of the year with rosy and Donald

she called him a pimp, which means she called the girls ----------

where was your uproar over that

she said that he was using the girls for monetary gain that is true but the girls are using him for monetary gain too.

personally i never watch that show. but he has the right to air that show and the girls have the right to be on that show. Rasia has the right to dislike the show


but i am not to sure that Rasia has the right to stump all over someone Else's rights.

Muslims in this country have the right to worship their god. and they have the right not to sell pork. but they do not have the right to go to work for a store that they know sells pork and then start demanding that the store stop selling said pork

as for the broken republican party yes it is broken but it has been broken for 20 or more years and so have the democrats in fact the whole political system in this country is broken.

no one in Washington is there for the people they are there to get reelected and they all need to be replaced
on Jun 10, 2007
and this is the reason i am so against the democrats they want to remove all rights except for themselves.

lets take that crap at the beginning of the year with rosy and Donald

she called him a pimp, which means she called the girls ----------

where was your uproar over that


this is exactly what i am talking about dan....it is obvious you can't even get a handle on the don v rosie feud, lol. she called him a pimp meaning that he makes all his money off the backs of other people...exactly which girls did she call _______ ? (i'm guessin you mean "whores") the ones on the view?

don got on rosie's case when she kept spewing 9/11 conspiracy theories. he called her a bunch of names, in the trump tradition, including just plain calling her a loser. she responded by calling him names back, including calling him a pimp. the rest is history, but has little or nothing to do with what you describe.

don was not using the girls on the view for monetary gain...he's a billionaire. when don wants to make more money, he builds new buildings or exec produces his own shows.

and the only people he mentioned was rosie and barbara walters when she defended rosie on air. he claimed that she backed his side behind the scenes.

maybe you meant something else,,,but your writing is so juvenile that it is tough for anyone to decipher.

Muslims in this country have the right to worship their god. and they have the right not to sell pork. but they do not have the right to go to work for a store that they know sells pork and then start demanding that the store stop selling said pork


and where exactly is this happening?

as for the broken republican party yes it is broken but it has been broken for 20 or more years and so have the democrats in fact the whole political system in this country is broken.


20 years ago would be 1987. in 1987 the republican party was in it's modern "hey-day." Reagan was President. you know, the guy all the candidates are tripping over themselves to emmulate.

so if you are right, the GOP has sucked since before Reagan. let's see...reagan was President since he was elected in 80 and sworn in jan 1981. a day i remember cause every republican pointed to the iranian hostages being released as "proof" of the GOP's superiority. but that's a whole nother can o worms....

anyway, since they sucked since the 80's according to your position..., before that we have nixon (and 2 years of "moscow has no influence in poland" ford)...was that when all was right with the republicans? before that we have Ike in the 50's. is that what you are saying? that the republicans haven't been right since the 50's?

or are you just someone who talks out his butt? 1/2 out of fear developed thru the narrow channels you parrot and 1/2 from just pure ignorance and the delusions that have obviously developed in your head.

our system isn't broken dan. it may be bruised and a little tattered. and the constitution has some urine stains on it. but that is nothing that some informed, willing and vigilant American citizens can't fix by bringing those problems out into the fresh air.

just saying "everybody sucks" might make you feel good, but it's hardly the way things are. yes, there may be problems, and people of good concience might disagree on what exactly is wrong and what exactly the solution is...but that is a FAR cry from just recklessly damning everyone and everything cause you want life to return to the 1950's.







on Jun 10, 2007
the constitution has some urine stains on it.


and the democrats are trying to destroy that constitution and the republicans are trying to destroy parts of that constitution

don was not using the girls on the view for monetary gain...he's a billionaire. when don wants to make more money, he builds new buildings or exec produces his own shows.



i didn't say that don was using the girls for monetary gain Rasia did

but that is a FAR cry from just recklessly damning everyone and everything cause you want life to return to the 1950's.


how would i know what life was in the 50's. i am not that old.

why do you think i keep saying in the last 30 years because i am 40 years old and i have no idea what things were like for the first 10 years

don was not using the girls on the view for monetary gain


Rasia was not talking about the girls on the view. she was talking about miss USA you know the one that don gave a second chance to and Rasia didn't agree with him doing that. that is when she called him a pimp which means she was call the contestants for miss USA whores.


in my opinion Reagan was the last great president of the USA before that i don't know the first one i remember is Nixon. and the law that he broke wasn't a law when he broke it. one of the people who got that law passed and made it a law yesterday was Hillary random now know as Hillary random Clinton.

on Jun 10, 2007
Bush is the same guy that he was in 2004 when Republicans still claimed him vociferously. He still has a high approval rating amongst Republicans. What they didn't understand was that the same things he was doing during the first term would continue. Only the Republicans and some optimistic independents thought it otherwise. The same problems that plagued his administration in 2004 are still there and he has taken the same role. So why do some Republicans choose to back away from him now when they backed the same guy 2 and a half years ago? Its because now they realize he is going to lose for them in 2008 as he lost for them in 2006, only this time its the presidency. Guess the most Republicans are not as loyal as Dubyah is.
on Jun 10, 2007

Bush is the same guy that he was in 2004 when Republicans still claimed him vociferously. He still has a high approval rating amongst Republicans. What they didn't understand was that the same things he was doing during the first term would continue. Only the Republicans and some optimistic independents thought it otherwise. The same problems that plagued his administration in 2004 are still there and he has taken the same role. So why do some Republicans choose to back away from him now when they backed the same guy 2 and a half years ago? Its because now they realize he is going to lose for them in 2008 as he lost for them in 2006, only this time its the presidency. Guess the most Republicans are not as loyal as Dubyah is.

Because conservatives expect Republicans to be better than Democrats.  This kind of behavior is normal for Democrats but Republicans should know better.

I expect Democrats to naively think bigger government will solve the world's ills and expect modern Democrats to favor endless nation building (look at the clamoring for Darfor even as they demand troops be withdrawn from Iraq).  I expect Democrats to waste tax payer money since most of them have no experience in building anything (nearly all Democratic law makers were lawyers as their sole occupation other than politics). 

In short, the Democrats have traditionally (since the 70s anyway) been the party of adult-aged children.  The Republicans were supposed to be the party of responsible adults.

But since the nomination of Harriet Meyers for the Supreme Court, it's been clear that Bush really has no idea what he's doing on any isssue. He's just "some guy".  For the first 4 years, the fact he was surrounded by adults masked things better.