Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (757513)	1/18/2007 4:18:47 PM
From: JDN	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Amen brother, I have felt that way for some time now. My biggest BEEF against the Bush's is they are TOO MUCH gentlemen and not enough street fighters. I wanted Bush to TAKE NAMES and ANNOUNCE THEM to the public along with the DANGER these people are causing to WE THE PEOPLE. But, Bush didnt do it in a wasted effort of trying to PLACATE these left wing mongers. jdn

To: PROLIFE who wrote (757513)	1/18/2007 7:21:21 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Re: "Open Letter to ALL Members of the GOP" Funny... I thought it was because the national Party signed up for Big Government, big deficits, big spending, Big Brother Authoritarianism and over-bearing Puritanical totalitarian disregard for freedom. (That, and a series of incompetent foreign policy blunders... all on borrowed money.) But... if you think that the real reason for G.O.P. electoral difficulties is because their 'tent was too big', then by all means, continue to think so! (I would not dream to disturb your Authoritarian fantasies: YES, the American people are secretly crying out for a Fearless Authoritarian Leader, a new Monarch! No, they don't care about wasteful, intrusive, liberty-depriving Big Government! All they really want is a firm ruler to tell them how they are allowed to live! .... dream on, Pro, dream on. It will only insure that you never understand what is going on.) :-(

To: PROLIFE who wrote (757513)	1/19/2007 1:20:28 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Will Iraq 'black hole' swallow GOP in '08? BY ROBERT NOVAK Sun-Times Columnist January 18, 2007 (http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/215553,CST-EDT-novak18.article) The sense of impending political doom that clutches Republican hearts, one week after President Bush presented his new strategy on Iraq, is stoked by the alarming intelligence brought back from Baghdad by GOP Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota and passed around Capitol Hill. In a pre-Christmas visit to Iraq, Coleman and Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida met with Mowaffak al-Rubaie, the Iraqi government's national security adviser. Coleman described their astounding encounter in a Dec. 19 blog: ''Dr. Rubaie maintains that the major challenge facing Iraq is not a sectarian conflict but rather al-Qaida and disgruntled Baathists seeking to regain power. Both Sen. Nelson and I react with incredulity to that assessment. Rubaie cautions against more troops in Baghdad.'' Rubaie denied the overriding reality of sectarian violence in Baghdad because his government is tied to the Shiite belligerents in that conflict. While Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki gives Bush lip service about cracking down on Mahdi Army commander Muqtada al-Sadr, U.S. officials recognize Maliki's political support depends on the Shiite militia leader. Thus, Maliki's government is in denial about sectarian conflict. Maliki did not show up for a press conference at which he was scheduled to comment on Bush's new strategy. This hastens the desire of Republicans, who once cheered the Bush Doctrine in the Middle East, to remove U.S. forces from a politically deteriorating condition as soon as possible. ''Iraq is a black hole for the Republican Party,'' a prominent party strategist told me. What makes his comments so important is that he is not a maverick Republican in Congress but one of Bush's principal political advisers. As they adjust to the 2006 election returns, Republicans recognize that this was no isolated bump in the road. The loss of 323 state legislative seats across the country to the Democrats classifies last year's election as a midrange electoral disaster. The internal Republican debate concerns how much Iraq contributed to this outcome. The White House and Republican members of Congress who voted for intervention in Iraq contend many issues led to their defeat: incompetent management of the Hurricane Katrina crisis, widespread cases of corruption and abandonment of spending restraint. But at the grass roots, Republicans tell me that Iraq was the central problem. Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich, a popular and effective Republican who had nothing to do with Iraq policy, believes his defeat was wholly caused by the war. The defeats, down to the local level, in a variety of states -- such as Maryland, New Hampshire, Oregon and Missouri -- are blamed by Republicans there on Iraq. One nationally prominent Republican pollster reported confidentially on Capitol Hill after the president's speech that if U.S. boots are still on the ground in Iraq and U.S. blood is still being spilled there at the end of the year, the GOP disaster in 2008 will eclipse 2006. Thus, many GOP members of Congress have tied their hopes to Bush's pledge that Iraqi forces will take over local security by September. But GOP opposition has intensified rather than diminished since Bush's speech. What was whispered privately is now declared publicly. At last week's hearing, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's second-ranking Republican -- Sen. Chuck Hagel -- called Bush's new strategy ''the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.'' The conservative elite of the House of Representatives, members who had 100 percent positive voting records as measured by the American Conservative Union, gathered Wednesday for the group's breakfast on Capitol Hill. They still talked about ''winning'' in Iraq and deplored the consequences of ''surrendering.'' But they do not know how that victory can be achieved if the Iraqi government is tied to the Shiite militia, a political dilemma in Iraq that no increase in U.S. troops can solve. Republicans can only hope that Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her sidekick, Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, overplay their hands by cutting off funds to U.S. troops in the field. It is a slim hope for now. © Copyright 2007 Sun-Times News Group