Compassionate conservatism?

[Gab]

Originally posted by Oblivion437: First, Gab, don't speak for everyone. I'm going to be frank, you look an like an overbearing, pompous asshole when you do that. Maybe you're not, but you're certainly acting like it. Miller will go down in the minds of many as one of the "last good Democrats" for sticking true to the founders' views. Also, to call his speech pathetic and inaccurate is both wrong and an insult to speech givers everywhere. It was a damn solid speech, and he delivered it well. Miller sits in the Republican caucus because he's a Conservative, and so are they. They agree on issues. One's loyalty as a representative is to one's constituency before one's party. Besides that, Miller's been a Democrat longer than you'd think. He's been a Democrat, registered so, since before it was hip to be liberal, and the DNC decided being hip was above being solid. The whole thing started in the post-civil war Democrat party backlash, where to win votes they used lots of demagoguery. To say the least, Kerry hasn't distinguished himself as anything other than non-distinguishable, another empty gray suit with a pretty face and nice words to sell. No actual position to sit on. It's not like Miller doesn't usually agree with the DNC, no doubt, while Conservative in some ways, he does advocate some liberal platforms, such as Social Security.

I'm sorry if I've offended you, I just totally hate Zell Miller and will forever see him as a traitor. How can this guy still call himself a Democrat when he's so pro-Republican? I dare even say that there are a few moderates within the Republican party that are less conservative than he is. I can even remeber that you called him a "rat bastrd traitor" many months ago (in a topic intiated by John D Harris). Now you're defending him. Is that flip-floping or what?

I hated his speech simply because it WAS inaccurrate, and damn outragous. He made Kerry look unpatriotic when he said: "For more than 20 years, on every one of the great issues of freedom and security, Kerry has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure."

If you even read Strider's article, you'd know that even some Republicans didn't like it. There were severals inacurraccies, such as when he said that John Kerry opposed the weapons system that won the Cold War (he only opposed certain weapons systems, such as the B-2 stealth bomber, that were very controversial and expensive).

[ 09-05-2004, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: Gab ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Huh? Why should I explain this exactly?

Because this is a discussion and it is called manners, I believe there was quite a bit writen in other threads namely the "what is this forum coming too thread" about complants because the discussions were not progressing the way some wanted them to. Well if anybody wants to discuss then discuss, that requires both sides asking and answering. So what if G.H.B. wanted to do away with anything. How does his wanting to do away with anything change Kerry's also voting to do away it also?

Wrong?

Are you asking how it is wrong? or stating it is wrong? If stating how it is wrong: Wrong How? You just stated it is wrong are you beyond backing it up with reasoning? Should it be accepted that it is wrong because you say so!

What is wrong is Miller's been exposed as: A.unstable B.unstatesmen-like C.traitor to his own party. D. misleading about Kerry's voting record and position on National Defense All of the above is what is wrong.

Miller may very well be unstable that was not the question I asked.
dito for unstatesmen-like
dito for tratitor to his own party
How is it misleading? You have yet to answer that question, show me where Kerry voted for something Miller said Kerry voted agianst! Is it that hard to do?

[John D Harris]

Gab re-read Obliv's post earlier http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...=001003#000000
you will see he (Obliv)is being sarcastic. He is not calling Miller a "rat bastard traitor"

[Oblivion437]

See the lord up in the tower

A Gord in the wind

Swaying this way, swaying that way

[Oblivion437]

Little John Horner sat in the corner, dipping his finger in every pie, but not sure which to eat...

The man says something, then votes against it...His record and his publicly accessible speeches prove this point over, and over, and over.

Either he's flip-flopping like someone shot him up full of joy juice before every vote (who the hell knows, maybe the Botox is eating his brains? I'm guessing GWB's sense of smell is no wonder either) but after every speech, or else he's a damned hypocrite.

You're going to vote for a man who says what he does, but acts in the opposite direction? This at the Kerry supporters as a general group, mind you. They're not really Kerry supporters anyways. Like Kerry himself, it's *anyone but Bush* and that's why they'll vote for Kerry. Obviously that's not much of a ticket to run on, so Mr. Hillary Klinton can run in '08, pretty much without fear of losing, but he better watch his back, somebody's going to get itchy trigger fingers...

[Felix The Assassin]

Originally posted by Gab: Bush flip-flops himself. Chewie has already given you some examples that you have yet to respond to.

When did you become the person in charge of Replies?

[Lucern]

Did the almost-naked imperialism present in Miller's, Shwarzenegger's, and Bush's speeches bother anyone else? What about this UN bashing? And I'm not using imperialism as a swear word here, I saw imperialist justifications for Iraq and hints of more to come in the "Broader Middle East".

[Felix The Assassin]

Originally posted by The Hierophant: quote: Originally posted by Felix The Assassin: I don't full yagree with all of Ws plan, but I know he has the intestinal fortitude to do what needs to be done.

What needs to be done? [/QUOTE]This pretty much sums it up.
I served under Tommys old man (Frederick) back in the day, he was an old school General from way back, meaner than a junk yard dog, and full of fire! I've heard Tommy is full of fire, but his meaness is channeled, and focused. Whatever the heck that means. I guess the difference between Niagara Falls, and a garden hose?

http://washingtontimes.com/national/...2819-5100r.htm

Franks calls Bush right man for job


By Christina Bellantoni
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

NEW YORK — Retired Army Gen. Tommy Franks, who this week endorsed President Bush, last night told the Republican National Convention that the president is the right man to lead the nation in the war on terror.
"I've been with this president in tough and uncertain times, and George W. Bush is the real thing," said Gen. Franks, who guided U.S. military forces in Afghanistan and Iraq.
"The past three years have been hard years, hard years, a time of hard decisions and tough choices. I have looked into this man's eyes and I have seen his character. I've seen courage and I've seen consistency, the courage to stand up to terrorists and the consistency necessary to beat them."
Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry focused much of his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention on his service in Vietnam in an effort to show he can be a wartime president.
Both campaigns say they must prove their nominee is the strongest person to lead the nation and will be victorious in the war on terror, a key issue with voters.
In his remarks last night, Gen. Franks took a stab at Mr. Kerry's position during the Democratic primaries that the war should be treated primarily as a law-enforcement issue.
"Now some argue that we should treat this war as a law-enforcement issue. And some say we should fight a less aggressive war — that we should retreat into a defensive posture and hope that the terrorists don't attack us again," Gen. Franks said. "Well, my wife, Cathy, and I are simply not willing to bet the future of our grandchildren on the good will of murderers."
He returned to this idea at the close of his speech, saying, "I choose President George W. Bush because I believe his leadership will help ensure a better future for my grandchildren — Anne Cathryn and Samuel Thomas Matlock."
Gen. Franks' comments echoed a central theme of Sen. Zell Miller's stinging rebuke of Mr. Kerry as weak on national security in a speech to the convention on Wednesday night. The Georgia Democrat told the convention that his support of Mr. Bush across party lines was largely because of concern for his family in the ongoing war against terrorism.
Gen. Franks last night defended the president's decision to invade Iraq.
"Today in Afghanistan and Iraq, more than 50 million men, women and children have been liberated from tyranny and these countries are no longer safe harbors for those who would launch the next attack against America," he said.
"The global war on terrorism will be a long fight. But make no mistake about it: We are going to fight the terrorists. The question is: Do we fight them over there or do we fight them here?
"I choose to fight them over there."
The retired general also asked the convention crowd to applaud the contributions of the countries that have joined the United States in the war on Saddam Hussein and the rebuilding of Iraq.
In a pointed reference to repeated criticisms by Mr. Kerry and other Democrats that Mr. Bush failed to rally enough support from the international community for the action in Iraq, Gen. Franks said, "Some have ridiculed the contributions made by our allies, but I can tell you that every contribution from every nation is important. Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in thanking our coalition partners for being there when America and the world needed them most."
Gen. Franks, who retired last summer after the invasion of Iraq, officially endorsed Mr. Bush Wednesday before he was added to the speaking roster.
In early August, Gen. Franks told ABC's "This Week" that he hadn't decided whether to endorse the president.
Gen. Franks said in newspaper interviews this week he does not want to make any negative comments about Mr. Kerry, calling the senator from Massachusetts "fully qualified" to be president "at another place in our history."
Last night, he summed up his support for Mr. Bush by saying, "I choose George W. Bush because we know that the next 200 years of American history will depend on the decisions our nation makes today."
Gen. Franks was introduced to the convention crowd by retired Marine Gen. P.X. Kelley, a longtime Bush supporter, and while he spoke, was backed by several retired generals and admirals. A roster of more than 200 other senior military officers who support Mr. Bush was shown on a screen behind him.
At the Democratic National Convention, retired Gen. John Shalikashvili and retired Lt. Gen. Claudia Kennedy spoke, along with Mr. Kerry's former challenger, retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark.

[The Hierophant]

Originally posted by Felix The Assassin: This pretty much sums it up. I served under Tommys old man (Frederick) back in the day, he was an old school General from way back, meaner than a junk yard dog, and full of fire! I've heard Tommy is full of fire, but his meaness is channeled, and focused. Whatever the heck that means. I guess the difference between Niagara Falls, and a garden hose? http://washingtontimes.com/national/...2819-5100r.htm

I see... thank you for your answer. I think I understand your position now.

[The Hierophant]

Originally posted by Lucern: Did the almost-naked imperialism present in Miller's, Shwarzenegger's, and Bush's speeches bother anyone else? What about this UN bashing? And I'm not using imperialism as a swear word here, I saw imperialist justifications for Iraq and hints of more to come in the "Broader Middle East".

What's wrong with imperialism?