saturneptune
New Member
I believe that mouth opens enough for you to easily stick your foot in it.
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
An open letter to conservatives
- Thread starter Magnetic Poles
- Start date
My 13 Wide does fit in there on a regular basis:smilewinkgrin:
No problem.
Funny thing about the Bush administration. A lot of people did believe he was a conservative because he rode into town (to use the cowboy lingo he was so fond of) and started with a conservative bang by immediately lowering taxes across the board and by instituting tax incentives for small businesses. He said all the right things. He even started off doing a couple of the right things.
I have to admit, he had me fooled for a while, too.
Didn't realize you had an operation. We'll be sure to pray for your recovery.
PS. Yes, I know it's bloc, not "block".
saturneptune
New Member
I only wear a 8.5 wide, but I have been known to put both in at once.
Got to disagree with you S-N (surprised?). One example: When Repiblicans were going forward with Comprehensive Immigration Reform, the resulting howls of protest convinced them to drop it. Look at the Healthcare situation: Democrats know very well that the country is against them, yet they were determined to have their bill regardless. And now they've got it.
Also, can you imagine Rand Paul being allowed to run as a Democrat? He wouldn't even get on the ballot. As it stands, quite a few Rebublicans have endorsed him.
There are differences. Obviously not enough to suit some people but they are there.
I don't see where he's saying those things. And he's not calling all Republicans racist; he's telling them to dissociate themselves from those out there who are (which are in the links, and there are some doozies in there!)
It is certainly more intelligent than that Zardozz link, which was earlier, and this was probably an answer to.
His ultimate message here is at the bottom, and which I think is the best attitude:
saturneptune
New Member
No, I cannot say I am surprised. You said in your post above that the "distant howls of protest conviced them to drop it." From 2001-2007, the Republicans had control of both houses of Congress and the White House. They lost the Congress in the 2006 mid-term election because of betraying conservative and Constitutional values, plus their own ineptness. They were elected in the 2000 election by the people to reform immigration, reform social security and medicare, to limit or stop abortion, to balance the budget, to limit government spending, and most important of all, if there is a war worth fighting, it is worth fighting to win and win quickly. They failed on everyone of these points. They, the Republicans, had total control of the federal government. If they could not govern with those kind of numbers, then they cannot govern. Not only did they fail on these points, they took up the liberal cause, and created record deficits for the time, expanded government at a rate never seen before, (such as part D Medicare), and at the end of the Bush term, spent almost one trillion extra dollars on "bailouts."
If the Republicans had been serious about a Constitutional or conservative agenda they ran on, "howls of protest" would not have stopped them. What they are is a bunch of weak, inept, spineless leaders, not worthy of a party even to be in existence. Did the Democrats, who now own all branches of government, drop health care reform because they heard "howls of protest" without one Republican vote? I wish they had of dropped it, but that is not the point. The point is, if you cannot govern, then move aside and let someone who can take the reigns. Democrats are not the answer, and Republicans are not the answer. The majority of Americans want a return to the Constitution. It is a matter of organization and will. All it will take is for the citizens to get enough of both parties.
Ron and Rand Paul seem to disagree with you, since they both run as Republicans.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Liberals think they're the only ones who should be allowed to have free speech. At least Bush let the people have "free speech zones" which I thought then and still do was quite anti-American.
But that's nothing compared to the message of the Obamanoids and the mass dream media today. These people actually believe that if you disagree with them your right to free speech should be revoked by the state.
Not much of a surprise when you consider that this kind of noise is coming from folks so enamored with state power.
Last edited by a moderator:
Misquote much?
And this relates to freedom of speech how again?
But to answer your question, Pres. Bush said it.
Question for you: Which Secretary of State said, "Every nation has to either be with us, or against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price."
That's correct, Hillary Clintonhttp://www.baptistboard.com/#cite_note-3
Last edited by a moderator:
Congratulations, you win.
Again you are right. It was Hillary Clinton on September 13th, 2001. Give the man two bags of popcorn.
IMO, the way for conservatives to regain ground is not to scream and march in Tea Party Rallies (which scare the moderates and some conservatives and inflame the liberals)and the like but to propose alternatives that provide solutions to the problems of our time.
Don't like health care reform? How about providing a palatable solution? You can't ignore the system. Obama's plan may not make much better, but it's an effort to do SOMETHING.
Don't like socially progressive ideals? Make a case without seeming bigoted. I'm not saying conservatives are bigoted, but it's very easy to come across that way if you aren't careful.
Want to stop abortion? Make the case to the American public in a reasoned, compassionate way.
I can't tell you how badly I want to be able to vote for a reasonable conservative candidate. I refused to vote for Obama in the last election due to social concerns, but I didn't want to vote for Palin (McCain was ok, just not with Palin).
I am religiously conservative. I voted for George W. Bush. Although I wasn't a fan of the war in Iraq, I understand that we have to take aggressive actions at times. I hate abortion. I don't like burdening businesses with unnecessary taxes that stifle growth and cause losses of jobs and higher costs to the consumer.
However, I also don't like irresponsible tax cuts that create massive deficits. I don't like ever expanding government when it isn't necessary. I believe health care needs reform, or it will choke businesses and individuals out of all of their money over the very near future.
You see my problem? I might favor a democratic response on one or two issues, and I would favor a conservative approach on all others. I could even favor a conservative approach on the democratic issues if a reasonable proposal ever came out.
However, on healthcare, it was apparent that the GOP didn't propose a viable alternative, not even a free-market solution like McCain proposed in the campaign (which was a decent proposal).
All I want is a conservative candidate who isn't afraid to appear "smart." That means no Sarah Palin. That means no constant, misleading references to socialism. Just make a strong, coherent case for your positions with respect for your opponents. I don't care if the Democrats don't return the favor. Others' indiscretions are no excuse for your own.
Don't like health care reform? How about providing a palatable solution? You can't ignore the system. Obama's plan may not make much better, but it's an effort to do SOMETHING.
Don't like socially progressive ideals? Make a case without seeming bigoted. I'm not saying conservatives are bigoted, but it's very easy to come across that way if you aren't careful.
Want to stop abortion? Make the case to the American public in a reasoned, compassionate way.
I can't tell you how badly I want to be able to vote for a reasonable conservative candidate. I refused to vote for Obama in the last election due to social concerns, but I didn't want to vote for Palin (McCain was ok, just not with Palin).
I am religiously conservative. I voted for George W. Bush. Although I wasn't a fan of the war in Iraq, I understand that we have to take aggressive actions at times. I hate abortion. I don't like burdening businesses with unnecessary taxes that stifle growth and cause losses of jobs and higher costs to the consumer.
However, I also don't like irresponsible tax cuts that create massive deficits. I don't like ever expanding government when it isn't necessary. I believe health care needs reform, or it will choke businesses and individuals out of all of their money over the very near future.
You see my problem? I might favor a democratic response on one or two issues, and I would favor a conservative approach on all others. I could even favor a conservative approach on the democratic issues if a reasonable proposal ever came out.
However, on healthcare, it was apparent that the GOP didn't propose a viable alternative, not even a free-market solution like McCain proposed in the campaign (which was a decent proposal).
All I want is a conservative candidate who isn't afraid to appear "smart." That means no Sarah Palin. That means no constant, misleading references to socialism. Just make a strong, coherent case for your positions with respect for your opponents. I don't care if the Democrats don't return the favor. Others' indiscretions are no excuse for your own.
It has nothing to do with Kool-Aid. I'm simply pleading for a reasonable conservative to rise to prominence. I don't want a Tea Partier or Sarah Palin wannabe.
We can agree on one thing then. Sarah Palin is a fool and I hope that the republican party distances itself from her as much as possible.