Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

I don’t remember ever seeing President Clinton angry.
Anger all we saw from John Kerry, and we saw even more anger from the 527’s and his celebrity supporters. That’s part of the reason he lost the election. Showing anger is also why President Bush’s poll numbers dropped after the first debate.
One of Kerry’s mistakes was not distancing himself from the 527’s and people like Michael Moore. He would have done better to have said, “I agree with what they say, but not the way they’re saying it.”
One of the things that made Bill Clinton a good politician was that he could disagree with his opponents without showing anger, and debate without being condescending. Unfortunately, the liberals are having a problem with that these days.
Yes, God bless America

Dawn said: John F. Kerry came close to winning.
There are a lot of peope who were afraid of what might have happened in the next four years if he had become President.

There are more who are afraid of what Bush holds for the next 4 years, but some of them didn’t vote.

Dawn, you are so right that if this country is going to change for the better, it will be up to the people to make it happen. Congress is responsible for so much of failure in legislation, parliamentary procedure, and selling out to special interests to the detriment of the nation as a whole. I hope your readers will contemplate the wisdom of your words regarding holding representatives accountable. The rubber stamping of incumbents this last election does not hold out much hope however….

Most Congress person’s greatest nightmare is an informed electorate. Is it any wonder No Child Left behind was never fully funded? Congress person’s second greatest nightmare is a healthy economic and fiscal status, for then the electorate will focus on political issues instead of their pocketbooks and jobs. The process is a mess and incumbents are entirely responsible.

David

Bush won by a couple of million votes. Turnout was high. This was not a stealth victory. He is the President by a majority vote of the American people in an election that even the Democratic leadership says was fair. I wish you guys would stop implying (or outright saying) that he is not legitimate. He is the first person to win more than 50% of the vote since 1988. He is our president, yours and mine.

The United States welcomed 53,000 refugees for resettlement during the fiscal year that ended in September, leading the world in offering a permanent home to peoples who, in some cases, have been trapped in refugee camps for decades.

The United States accepted more refugees than the 10 other countries involved in resettlement, offering a new start to 54% of the world’s refugees resettled in fiscal year 2004.

http://usinfo.state.gov/eur/Archive/2004/Nov/18-38044.html

God bless America indeed. We don’t get enough credit for the good we do.

“There are more who are afraid of what Bush holds for the next 4 years, but some of them didn’t vote.”

Then what they think doesn’t really matter, does it?

Only unpatriotic, uncaring, nonthinking, un-American people don’t vote. Just my opinion, of course, but I’d like to see you try to argue the point!

And don’t say “because there was no one worth voting for.” That’s why we have write-ins.

God bless the Americans who cared enough to do their part.

Why not “God Bless the World” ?
(Isn’t America part of the world anyway ?)
It may help to sound less egocentric.

jack, you are seeing things that aren’t there. Your reply to my comment responds to some illusion that I made some claim about the illegitimacy or doubt as to Bush’s win. If you read my words, you will find nothing there to impugn or doubt the legitimacy of Bush’s election.

As for his being your president, fine. As for his being my President - absolutely not. I would not go into the armed forces to fight for him, I would not support any policy of his which was not prima facia in the interests of the nation as a whole. No! He is not my president. He is my country’s president just as slavery was my country’s past. I am proud of neither will and continue to oppose both. I have the highest respect for the office of President - but, that does not mean I have to respect the man that holds that office.

I lost considerable respect for Clinton when he brought his personal life into the oval office. I lost considerable respect for Bush when he brought his personal motives into the decision to invade Iraq, and his political motives into the decision to massively increase the national debt which my daughter will have to pay for much of her working life. I hope I live long enough to see a man or woman hold the office of President who commands my respect for their person acting as President as well as their office.

Bush won by a couple of million votes. Turnout was high. This was not a stealth victory. He is the President by a majority vote of the American people in an election that even the Democratic leadership says was fair. I wish you guys would stop implying (or outright saying) that he is not legitimate. He is the first person to win more than 50% of the vote since 1988. He is our president, yours and mine.

Your last sentence reminds me of when Dick Armey said, of Clinton, “Your president is just not that important to us.” Clinton had won by almost 6 million votes, and had a 200+ margin in the electoral college. (This was his first term). He ran on the issues rather than character assassination.

So yes, legally speaking, Dubya is my president, just as Clinton was Armey’s president.

jack said God bless America indeed. We don’t get enough credit for the good we do.

That is true enough, without doubt. It is just as true that we could do so many things better than we have, but, as a people, choose not to. What makes America great is the degree to which it stives for the noble goals and aspirations and hopes set out in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. To the degree we strive mightily toward those, great credit is due. And to the degree that we don’t, much criticism is warranted, and change needed.

Amigaphil, great comment! But it ignores the phobia the slight majority of voters who elected Bush have toward the rest of the world. America has a long history of looking down upon any who don’t look, sound, act, and worship as the mainstream American does. America will be comfortable with the world when it controls the world, or when the rest of the world politically looks, acts, sounds and worships the same as we do.

Borg Americans will not be secure until all others have been assimilated. Hopefully, Borg Americans will not remain a majority of voters indefinitely. Even the Borg have weaknesses and can sow the seeds of their own undoing, so to speak.

TheTraveller, It is not possible to justify not voting in America if one has the wherewithall. I certainly would not even try.

The Government however, has an obligation to represent the interests of ALL AMERICANS including those that did not vote, for whatever reasons. To do otherwise, is unpatriotic and un-American. I suspect that one of the reasons many of those 50 plus million who did vote, but not for Bush, did so.

“The Government however, has an obligation to represent the interests of ALL AMERICANS including those that did not vote, for whatever reasons.”

Don’t they? That’s what the House of Representatives is for, to represent the population.
There were quite a few congressional elections this year as well, so I don’t think anyone (except non-voters) is going un-represented.

Also, just because someone voted for Kerry doesn’t mean they oppose President Bush’s policies. Maybe they support them and simply thought Kerry could do a better job.
Take the war in Iraq, for example. The candidate’s plans for Iraq were almost identical, despite all the argument.
As for those who did not vote, how can they be represented? Voting is the way we have our say. I’ll stand by what I said before. What non-voters think is irrelevant.

It’s funny how some people assume the ones who did not vote were voting against Bush.
Maybe they just couldn’t decide for sure and didn’t want to give one or the other their vote. Maybe they couldn’t make it to the polls or maybe they just don’t care because they think it doesn’t matter who is President…

It was the biggest turnout ever. It may have been even bigger if more people believed their vote can make a difference. Not just in the election for President, but for all the representatives.
Of course, what happened in S.Dakota may show voters that it can be done.
Just how many of our ‘leaders’ have been there for more than 2 terms? I can understand why people who may want a real change know they aren’t going to get one.
I still vote for term limits.

I was surprised to see how many people had no one running against them when I went to vote. Did that happen to any of you in your local elections?

AmigaPhil,
“Why not ‘God Bless the World’?”
I don’t have a problem with that.

“(Isn’t America part of the world anyway ?)
It may help to sound less egocentric.”

Considering I was talking about our elections and our people and what we should do to make our little part of the world a better place. A place that is looked at by the rest of the world as a good example of how the whole world should be.
I don’t think I was leaving the rest of the world out. I was talking about what we have to do. I have no idea why that sounds ‘egocentric’.
I wasn’t saying the whole world should be praying to God either. Stop the hate. Work together. If we are going to ask others in this world to do this, we have to do it ourselves.
By the way, if some in this world are insulted when our President says,’God Bless Everyone’, don’t you think that would apply to me also?
It shoud be considered a nice thing. Not something that insults. Not something that makes those who don’t believe in GOD feel like they are less important.
I say ..’Bless you’ or ‘God Bless you’ to total stangers in the store who sneeze near me. I get a thank you from everyone … so far. I am waiting for the day when someone turns and says ‘F - you’.

Dawn, good post. It’s hard to disagree with any of it but,

We must not elect people into office who do it by getting anyone to hate the other person.

…watch out. That’s exactly what Bush is guilty of. Bush made this election all about character instead of issues.

In order to win that kind of race, you need to assassinate the other guy’s character. Bush did an excellent job of that, just like he did with McCain and Gore in the last one.

But, good post. I totally agree with the sentiment. :)

Phil:

God Bless America—-God Bless the World
God bless Phil, God bless David, God bless Jack, God bless Stephen, God bless AP, God bless Dawn, God bless Traveler, God bless Adrienne, God bless Martin, God bless Bush God bless Kerry God bless Rob God bless Sam God bless Eric God bless Freddie God bless Joe God bless Julia God bless Alejo God bless Woody God bless Bert God bless…….

I could continue on until I have asked God to bless each and every person in the entire world.
When I root for the Cubs to win in baseball, I dont hate all the other teams, or want them to lose. I just want the Cubs to win. When I ask God to bless a person or a country, it is not to the exclusion of other people or countries.

Re Bush being our president

Woody

I didn’t like what Armey said any better. He was also wrong. In his defense, however, he used the term when talking to Democratic lawmakers, when it might make sense from a prosaic use of the language point of view.

Bush’s case is even more compelling. Bush actually won a majority (Clinton never did better than plurality). Bill Clinton was OUR president and so is George W. Bush. We don’t get to opt out on these things.

Just out of curiosity… why do we have so much anger towards those who do not vote, rather than simply seeing them as abstaining? We don’t (usually) get mad at our Senators if they choose to abstain, so why the anger towards our citizens?

AP,

“Bush made this election all about character instead of issues. In order to win that kind of race, you need to assassinate the other guy’s character. Bush did an excellent job of that.”

Ok, I’ll give you that, but so did Kerry.
It was obvious that President Bush and John Kerry have hated, or at least disliked, each other for years. Just look at their faces during the first debate, and how they reacted to each other. Bush was running ads against Kerry even before he was nominated.

That being said, character tells you a lot about a candidate. Look at my comparison of President Clinton and John Kerry in my first post here.
There’s nothing wrong with making character an issue as long as it isn’t dwelled on. Unfortunately, it usually is.

Jarandhel,

“Just out of curiosity… why do we have so much anger towards those who do not vote, rather than simply seeing them as abstaining? We don’t (usually) get mad at our Senators if they choose to abstain, so why the anger towards our citizens?”

Abstaining = not caring. We are fighting a war. People are dying. We’ve been debating the reasons of the war for three years. What kind of irresponsible person does not have an opinion?

Jarin

I don’t have anything against people who don’t vote. If you don’t want to take the time to be informed or you don’t have a clear preference it is probably a good, even unselfish, idea to stay home on Election Day. Americans have the right not to vote. By not voting, however, you are consenting to whomever the majority of the voters put in office. For legal and moral purposes, we have to assume that that the non-participants support the winner.

Re not voting

Reminds me of the story of the little boy who never talks. His parents take him to doctors and specialists. They can’t find anything wrong with him physically or mentally. He just doesn’t talk. Finally when he is about five he says to his mother, “the oatmeal is cold.” She says, “You can talk?” He replies, “of course I can.” “Then why didn’t you talk for the last five years?” He says, “Up until now, everything has been okay?”

Jarin:

I agree with Jack. I’m okay with people choosing not to vote, but i’m not okay with these same people then complaining about the outcome. Or even other people complaining about the outcome.

Some abstain from voting because they see no candidate who meets their approval, but I’d daresay that most dont vote simply because they were too lazy or preoccupied to do so. These people have the right to not vote, but should never have the right to complain about the results.

AP,

You are one I did not expect to imply that the hate and character assassination only came from one side.

I saw it from both sides. Of course the people on ‘a side’ thought the other side was worse. Human nature, I guess.