29 comments

  1. Bull Moose says:

    So, this ad would have you believe that by voting Republican, you are patriotic and believe in stopping the terrorists and if you don’t vote Republican, you’re what, a terrorist who believes we’re getting what we deserve?

    I am a Republican voter who feels like my intelligence is being insulted.

  2. Chris says:

    When do you think the party in power will actually make us safe? It’s been six years since this need was brought home in a rather nightmarish way, so what have they done so far to make us safer?

    I keep reading about all the new terrorists being created in Iraq and Afghanistan, and how terrorist activity keeps rising instead of falling, and about how, despite our country being the number one target, the borders are more porous now than when we started.

    I want my country back, the one that allows me to love living here instead of fearing it, the one that lets me enjoy the freedoms this country is supposed to provide instead of having to hide them. When do you think the government will do something to actually make us safer, measurably safer, where we can actually feel it?

  3. Chris says:

    That’s what that ad is saying: we haven’t done anything to make this country more safe and secure, if anything you’re more at risk now than ever before.

    Thanks, GOP.

  4. Jeff Emanuel says:

    When do you think the party in power will actually make us safe? It’s been six years since this need was brought home in a rather nightmarish way, so what have they done so far to make us safer?

    Good question, Chris. Let’s start with this: what do you suggest that they do which will accomplish the “mak[ing] us safer,” and which will not result in you/the Left/Democrats saying:

    (a) Rights are being taken away, there’s a “chill wind blowing,” the Constitution is being trampled, and other common memes, or

    (b) We’re unjustly attacking people who pose no threat

  5. Chris says:

    Why do you or the GOP, or the government, care what I/the Left/Democrats say? Your party is in charge. When are they going to make us safer, because judging by that ad, we’re NOT any safer despite how many years of effort? You’ve taken every bit of the meat out of our freedoms outlined in the Bill of Rights, got massive overlapping surveillance programs going on, got a war front halfway around the world, and still we’re not any safer?

    What else can your party do before we’re actually going to start feeling safe again, without turning this country into Soviet Russia? Or is that the kind of country we’ll have to become to have our sense of safety?

    And how the hell did our freedoms survive 230 years before some two-bit terrorists from one of our ALLIES turned this country into just that, soviet style security?

  6. Jeff Emanuel says:

    Exactly my point. Rather than even single idea, you and the Left would rather snipe and criticize. If November goes like it has oft been predicted, Democrats will have to come up with something better than that.
    And who was the “ally” that committed the attacks of September 11? If you think Islamist jihadists or the Taliban were ever allies of the US, you should probably brush up on some history.

    Also, “Soviet-style security,” etc. — nice buzzwords and conveyance of more of the Left’s KnownFacts™. Do you care to — and can you — actually be specific, instead of simpley throwing out cliches?

  7. Chris says:

    15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, or did they not tell you that on Fox News?

    And regarding our relations with the Taliban prior to 9/11, it is YOU who may wish to brush up on a little history.

    And rather than answer my original question about how the GOP will make us safer, you instead asked how *I* would make us safer, repeatedly ignoring the fact that *I* nor any of my political allies are in power. Your party’s had 5 years, and are demanding more, with the promise of keeping us safe. Yet and still we’re in more danger than we’ve ever been. Why?

    You could do the right thing and admit that your party is just waving those terrorists around to scare us into voting for them yet again, and spare you the mental tiptoeing necessary for you to avoid admitting that your party and its supporters have benefitted enormously from terrorism, while increasing the chances we’re going to be prime targets for at least the next several generations.

    And your only solution is to gut our freedoms because the terrorists use those freedoms against us. And if that’s the case, and we’re sacrificing our freedoms, especially the important ones like the right to challenge our detention, for the next several generations, then tell me what exactly is this country good for anymore for us and our survivors?

  8. Chris says:

    And don’t you even try to paint this as tired inconsequential ramblings from the left. These thoughts and concerns are prevalent throughout the libertarian and constitutionalist parties, and are being shouted from the rooftops by your good old buddies at the John Birch Society, very much moreso than anything you’ll ever hear out of the weakneed Democratic appeasers.

  9. Jeff Emanuel says:

    Chris, you’re doing a great job of saying absolutely nothing.

    (1) What freedoms have been gutted? Just saying it over and over again not only doesn’t make it true, but makes you look less and less interested in facts and more and more in soundbite talking points.

    And “the right to challenge [y]our detention” has not been lost, Chris. It hasn’t even been “lost” to the terrorists who are captured on enemy battlefields — let alone to US citizens. Cite some actual facts, or drop the memes.

    (2) Increasing the chances that we’re going to be prime targets? Chris, we were hit first. We are the prime target; we were, and we will be, until we can stamp out the Islamist terror movement as a whole.

    (3) Who’s “demanding” power? You, I, and everybody else will vote November 7 to determine who has “power.” Or did you think that our “Soviet-style security” now prevented voting?

    (4) 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi in origin. Yep, good for you — what’s your point? And nice removal of any suggestion that you’re anything besides a far-left nut with the crack at Fox News. Each comment you post here, in fact, is less coherent and, rather than including more facts, substitutes catchphrases, talking points, and KnownFacts™ with increasing frequency.

    (5) OK, refresh me. What was “our” supposed relation with the Taliban before 9/11/01? Besides the fact that we had constant contact with, and provided military advice to, the Norther Alliance (which was the loosely-formed coalition against the Taliban — ouch, facts….). I’m anxiously awaiting a history lesson. And not to go DYKWIA on you, but I was there, partner. KnownFacts™ may sound great to you in your desire to hate all things conservative/Republican, but — far more often than not — they just don’t jive with actual events, facts, and experiences.

    (6) Still waiting for proposed solutions. The smallest and weakest of men can snipe from the back of the room — for, at the end of the day, they have no bearing whatsoever on what the great men who lead, and who make decisions that actually matter, do — because the small man, due to his own petty concerns and actions, will often never get the chance to be a great man, or to lead.

    Why not try putting pettiness behind you for just a minute, being a bigger man, and working for a solution, rather than simply belittling everybody else and claiming that they must fix the world’s problems, because “[ neither you] nor any of [your] political allies are in power.” Statements like that just reinforce the fact that you shouldn’t be in power, either.
    Nice excuse for having zero suggestions or ideas, whatsoever.

  10. Chris says:

    And since Bush’s signing of the Military Tribunals Act, “the administration has formally notified the U.S. District Court here that it no longer has jurisdiction to consider hundreds of habeas corpus petitions filed by inmates at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba.”

    Further, the Justice Department said: The new Military Commissions Act (MCA), it said, provides that “no court, justice, or judge” can consider those petitions or other actions related to treatment or imprisonment filed by anyone designated as an enemy combatant, now or in the future.

    Source

  11. Chris says:

    (1) What freedoms have been gutted?

    You’ll know soon enough, when a liberal takes the White House again. Until then, enjoy your little ride.

  12. Chris says:

    (2) Increasing the chances that we’re going to be prime targets? Chris, we were hit first. We are the prime target; we were, and we will be, until we can stamp out the Islamist terror movement as a whole.

    I think Iraqi reparations 30 years from now should come out of YOUR pocket.

  13. Chris says:

    (4) 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi in origin. Yep, good for you — what’s your point?

    Yes, the same Saudi Arabia that your party relentlessly accused for nearly a decade of teaching anti-American hatred in their schools. I believed you then, and still believe it now, so when we’re attacked as a result of that Islam extremist indoctrination, your party goes after the secular government in Iraq of all places. I see no interest whatsoever in your party’s will or capabilities to eradicate Islamic extremism that’s breeding new generations of terrorists with every graduating class, in Saudi Arabia. In fact you seem to have forgotten all you said a decade ago about how evil those people are, and think we should be friends with the Saudis instead. I guess there’s just something special about them that makes it ok for them to fuel Islam extremism and get a free pass on it.

    Not what I’d expect however from a party wo acts determined to wipe the evil Islamic extremists from existence.

  14. Chris says:

    Why not try putting pettiness behind you for just a minute, being a bigger man, and working for a solution, rather than simply belittling everybody else and claiming that they must fix the world’s problems, because “[ neither you] nor any of [your] political allies are in power.

  15. Chris says:

    (4) 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi in origin. Yep, good for you — what’s your point?

    An additional point I could make is that one of Bin Laden’s demands was for the US to withdraw its military presence from Saudi Arabia, and gee whiz guess what George Bush did…

    Saying that he caved to the terrorists’ demands would be rude, but he did shut down US military bases there.

  16. Mad Dog says:

    Jeff,

    You’re stuck with a very lame argument and it just hurts to watch you struggle with it.

    The argument goes like this.

    Someone ‘walking’ down the street sees you driving down the street with four flat tires. They scream at you, “HEY! You’ve got four flat tires!”

    And, you scream back, “STOP the criticism. Invent a car that doesn’t need tires! Dang, pedestrians don’t even own cars! Let them get a car and then they can tell me how to drive.”

  17. Jeff Emanuel says:

    It depends on your point of view, MD. From my seat — dealing with the facts of the situation, the history, and personal experience in each of the war theaters being debated — it’s the opposition arguments which are “lame,” as you so eloquently put it.

    But, being the opposition, you are correct that all you have to do is point and yell. The question is, come November 8 (or, more correctly, January 21), should the House and/or Senate change hands, will you and yours have the ability, ideas, and mindset to work to solve the problems you so eagerly highlight now, while in the minority?

  18. Chris says:

    You betcha. It’s called the Military Tribunals Act. And guess who’s going to be named enemy number one.

  19. Mad Dog says:

    From your seat?

    You’re sitting in the middle of the road with four flat tires! Screaming at people, I’m behind the wheel!

    Your job is to keep pointing out, “I’ve got the keys to the car!”

    When you and yours have finally abandoned the car, I’ll be stuck with the huge bill for the tires, the wheels, the rims, the clutch, and engine you burned up.

    Then, you’ll get to yell, “See, you never knew anything about cars!”

    With the arrogance of you and yours, your history, and those facts of the situation, don’t expect the time of day from me.

    And, Jeff, … I didn’t forget the part about …”and personal experience in each of the war theaters being debated.”

    With you to remind us, no one will ever forget it.

    This is what you have in common with a race horse:

    You both were selected for raw ability.
    You were trained.
    You performed based on that training.

    The difference is, the horse doesn’t brag about it.

  20. defnotrep says:

    Well Jeff,

    I think I can safely say the Terry Schiavo fiasco won’t be repeated, Haliburton and big oil companies won’t get a blank check and windfall tax deals, and stay a failed course will be replaced with a strategy.

    Stem cell research will be revisited, an energy policy will be developed, global warming won’t be just a theory like it is to Bush.

    The demos aren’t perfect but they far outweigh to the positive what Bush had done.

  21. Bill Simon says:

    Jeff,

    The fact is, Chris is at least correct on one of his points: The GOP doesn’t have a solution worth a damn to deal with Iraq.

    “Stay the course.” Yeah, that’s a great solution to a cluster-f*** of proportions not seen since the Vietnam War.

  22. millie says:

    Gang: We are presently in a situation where we’re damned if we do and we’re damned if we don’t. I, too, am angry about the absolute mess we have on our hands. However, the question about what to do to make us safer, other than bombing the heck out of the rest of the world, deserves addressing. Here are some ideas:
    (1) Do not allow the government to play both ends against the middle. Why, for instance, are we building a border fence while at the same time encouraging and financing a NAFTA-superhighway that will allow privately-owned Chinese companies (or those of other nations) to unload products (and who knows what those “products” might be?) at Lazero Cardenes in Mexico, bring them straight up through Laredo through Kansas City and on up into Canada without true checks? There are even rumors that Kansas City will be the first border check and that first “land port” will be administered by Mexico. Imagine that. Rumors also of lots of very fine print in the agreements President Bush signed with Mexico and Canada to encourage a North American Union, complete with a NA ID card to allow free movement of people, goods, and money between the three countries. All not run through Congress, of course. Just good old private enterprise. Google ‘NAFTA SUPERHIGHWAY”. Read and weep. Check out who is running ports both here in America and in Mexico, Canada, and Central America. Try to have impact on what actually does come out of this area and who is “responsible”. I know that a Chinese company runs the port at Grand Bahama and at both ends of the Panama Canal. I belive I am correct that another Chinese company runs the Long Beach port. 2) Actually look at the agenda outlined by Osama bin Laden. We’re doing everything the guy could want. We might try not cooperating with him so much. 3)We might insist that all manufacturing of parts for military equipment take place here in America instead of out-sourced to other countries. Scares the heck out of me to think that “for want of a part”….
    Finally, the MAC is a TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL act. Whichever one of you suggested that American citizens could not get caught up in it obviously hasn’t read the thing. It is a travesty just waiting for a megolamaniac to begin rounding up political enemies and warehousing them without trial. Just read the thing. Watch how many times the phrase ‘ANY PERSON’ pops up. A shameful betrayal of America. Unforgiveable.

Comments are closed.