Support




Contact
Powered by
Movable Type

Why Are Conservatives So Down On The GOP?

The reasons offered, usually, are immigration, overspending, corruption, and general political ineptness.

But I wonder about that. At least, I wonder about the first three.

One that's not mentioned as frequently is the War in Iraq. Which I think is more of a factor in conservative disatisfaction that many conservative war-supporters are willing to admit, perhaps even to themselves.

The GOP was willing, it seemed at first, to go along with Bush's amnesty plan. Although the plan has supporters in Congress (like, for example, John McCain), no one would be suggesting such a plan were the President himself not pushing it, putting his own political capital and political muscle behind it.

It seems, then, wrong to blame congressional Republicans for Bush's political misadventure. Furthermore, of course, the congressional Republicans actuallly listened to their angry constituents and wounded Bush by refusing to support his plan, voting for a fence-first plan.

On overspending, the GOP has much to answer for, but at least they again listened and began, however slightly, to reform the corrupt and wasteful earmark system.

And on corruption: I think most conservatives believe government is inherently corrupt, which is one of the reasons we seek to limit it. (Actually, being realists, we believe humanity is inherently corrupt.) And while there has been corruption, it is not unexpected, it is not rampant, it is not being covered up. And of course the Democrats are more corrupt. (See Reid, Harry.)

And it's just not true that the GOP-controlled Congress hasn't managed anything positive. They voted through Bush's plan for detainees. They voted through quite a few acceptable constitutionalist judges (maybe the second biggest agenda-item after winning the war on terror). They've cut taxes and seek to make the cuts permanent (the third biggest agenda-item) and even talk of cutting them more.

So why so down?

I wonder if the last answer -- political ineptness -- is the driving reason. It's more fun to root for a winning team, isn't it? As a Giants fan, I know that when the Giants lose badly, not only am I depressed, but I actively wish them to lose all their games, partly to punish them for disappointing me, and a bit to force changes to the team (fire Coughlin!) and get better draft picks the following year.

Although a dispirited fanbase can hurt a team when it gets no cheers at home, the effects are fairly limited.

But in politics, of course, it's not really "the team" -- the candidates themselves -- who decide the outcome of "the game." It's the fans. The fans decide, by voting.

The dark mood of conservatives is part of a vicious cycle -- the GOP is perceived to be doing poorly at the polls, prone to make mistakes, failing to capitize on Democratic missteps, and just generally getting in their own way. This breeds resentment, which leads to conservatives declaring they won't vote for the GOP, which pushes the GOP down further in the polls, etc.

How much of the dextrosphere funk is due to objective policy failures of the GOP, and how much is due to the feeling they're losing, which disappoints us, and so we vent by wishing further failure on them?

I also wonder if the War in Iraq has an effect. The war isn't going well. We expected a fairly quick war and a fairly quick occupation; we got the former, but definitely not the latter.

Conservatives were, by a majority of perhaps 90%, in favor of the War in Iraq, most of us strongly so. (I know I was.) I wonder if criticizing the GOP on other issues is a way of expressing a disatisfaction with the War in Iraq which seems, somehow, forbidden. We pushed it, after all; we can hardly blame Bush for it. Myself, I savaged Bush online when he seemed to be backing away from a commitment to remove Saddam Hussein, or to be overly concerned with the UN and diplomacy and giving inspectors a chance and all that rot.

So I wonder if there's a bit of buyer's remorse here, magnifying the GOP's failings on other issues due to a possibly-unconscious need to lash out at Bush for the continuing chaos and violence in Iraq.

As Andrew Sullivan says -- I'm not endorsing this, I'm just airing it.

Actually, that's bullshit; I'm endorsing it, although tentatively. The conservative backlash against the GOP seems disproportionate to its sins, real and perceived. There has to be something else going on here, I think -- partly the sports fans' perpetual cry of "Fire all the bums," and partly a disatisfaction with the War on Iraq, which we feel has to be supported, and has to be won.

Which it does. It's just not as easy to do so as it once was, and it's beginning to look quite possible we will, in some ways, actually wind up losing a war we can't afford to lose, and no one from Bush on down seems to have any miracle solutions to reverse the state of things.


Posted by: Ace at 02:57 PM



Comments

1 I think that most conservative voters are just frustrated at why the GOP isn't fighting a little harder against the Dems, like they are fighting the Repubs. Why aren't we pressing our advantage (while we have it!) against the Dems? Why all the compromise when we have the majority? Why play nice?

Posted by: EC at October 12, 2006 03:17 PM (mAhn3)

2 I think you hit the overspending topic too lightly. The earmarks are only part of the problem, and this is the only part of the problem that shows minimal signs of progress. The bigger problem is the 'buy a vote' mentality and the non-stop pandering . For example, look at the billions thrown at Katrina with virtually no controls. It might buy minimal political capital, but at what cost? In the old days, the Democrats were the "mommy party", and the Republicans were the "daddy party". Nowadays, it seems like Uncle Sam has two mommies.

Posted by: OCBill at October 12, 2006 03:17 PM (ckGnY)

3 Very insightful. You must be sleeping better.

We can't lose the war in Iraq--we already won it. We made our point: Screw with us and we'll tip the whole apple cart on your ass. If those left standing can't get things back in order, hey, we tried to help. But the lesson is learned. Don't screw with us.

Sure, we bollocks'ed the peace pretty badly, but the war was won.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 12, 2006 03:19 PM (uSomN)

4 The only way we'll lose Iraq is if we listen to the whiners and give up. Nobody said that Iraq would be fixed within 3 or 4 years. Unfortunately, lefties have been whining constantly like children about Iraq for political reasons, and it's hard for people that aren't paying close attention to not fall for it.

Posted by: Stankleberry at October 12, 2006 03:22 PM (5x5Ao)

5 Real conservatives should be totally fed up with this administration. The Repubs control all three branches, yet 80% of what would be called the conservative agenda goes nowhere. Immigration, spending, nation building, the list goes on.
The corruption talking point is, I agree a non-starter, as both sides take bites of the apple when no one's looking. That's an inherent flaw of the system.
But this administration has been everything but conservative. I consider myself to the left but have voted for Republicans before (Reagan for one).
I shudder at the thought of my choices for President come '08. And here in Michigan my choices for governor are a Democratic incumbent who's done nothing to improve our limping economy and the damn son of the founder of Amway, who has no political experience or clear agenda.
Can you tell I'm a bit cynical today?

Posted by: mmm...lemonheads at October 12, 2006 03:23 PM (srlvz)

6 Here's part of it, at least. We're the majority party, but we won't act like it. And frequently that has a direct impact on issue #1: the War on Terror.

For example, Richard Armitage hid facts about the Plame matter that allowed the Dems to savage Repubs for a ridiculously long amount of time. That, in turn, drops GOP poll numbers, which emboldens terrorists who don't think we're in for the long haul.

Someone leaked info about CIA prisons to the NYT, which directly provides propagansa ammo to the terrorists, and yet the government did nothing. Bush got upset, but that's it.

SCOTUS tells the President he's not allowed to torture (i.e. play really loud music to) terrorists, and the Repubs do nothing until we have to beat the results out of them.

Ace, you made some good points about (eventual) congressional responsiveness to criticism, but we shouldn't have to beat the results out of them. They're the majority freakin party, and we're using all of our strength to get them to act consistently with their own stated principles. We shouldn't have to fight for these victories -- we already fought for them, and won in November 2004.

It's fatigue. Government won't work without constant criticism, but constant criticism is tiring. It's exhausting. Eventually, you decide you'd rather play on-line games about shooting zombies instead of calling your Senators about the latest fiasco.

Posted by: Sobek at October 12, 2006 03:24 PM (6GK9U)

7 You've definitely come close to articulating something I've been feeling ... a dissatisfaction that is stronger than it ought to be. And I do think Iraq has something to do with it.

Frankly, to me it's not just the trouble on the ground in Iraq, but the lack of clear leadership on the subject. Just LEAD us, Mr. President. Boldly. You know ... like 2001 George did, like 2003 George did. Like that.

And I think that may be the one component you're missing: the fact that for some of us (read: me), the current dissatisfaction comes partly from heightened expectations of leadership after seeing what Bush WAS capable of, post-9/11.

I didn't vote for Duyba in 2000. In fact, 2004 was my first Republican presidential vote. And it was the proudest of my life, because I'd been *so* impressed by Bush's leadership after 9/11. I supported the Iraq invasion wholeheartedly - and again, Bush's leadership seemed almost unprecedented. I couldn't believe we had a leader with balls enough to take the reins if the UN wouldn't do the work - to tell Hussein he had 72 hours to get out of Dodge City - and then to actually FOLLOW THROUGH WITH IT!

So anti-Clinton (and I voted for that douche twice. Forgive me. I was young and stupid.). I understood Iraq. I knew it needed to be done. And I was ready for a tough fight.

But I assumed that we'd either: 1) leave Iraq once Saddam was gone, and let the Iraqis sort it out, or 2) actually OCCUPY the country - put half a million troops in there and lock it down. One way or the other.

But instead, we get our troops stuck as sitting ducks. Not fighing. Not being wounded in battle. Just being picked off by terrorist pussies. Unable to really even fight back.

That's not leadership. It's not the Dubya I was so proud to vote for. And I understand that he's under enormous political pressure ... but as much as I'd like to blame liberals, it's Bush who chose to cave to that pressure. To take all these half measures on immigration, half measures on N. Korea, half measures on Iran ... and Iraq.

Yes - liberals are pushing those half measures. But I *EXPECTED* Dubya to stand up to that pressure and frickin' LEAD us. No matter the political cost.

So, yeah, you're right. If I saw real leadership on Iraq, I'd probably forgive the rest.

I just want 2003 George back. That's all.

Posted by: Professor Blather at October 12, 2006 03:25 PM (MOAQd)

8 Ha! First!

I didn't expect a quick war, I expected a long one. I expected a conflict that would last long enough that my kindergarten age son will be military age before it is over. President Bush has always characterized this as a long hard slog requiring commitment.

In this hyper fast world 5 years seems like forever but it is not really. And the two main generational voices in your political system right now are the narcissistic Boomers and the cynical Gen-Xers.

What is more for the first time, conservatives have a structure and a voice in the media and yet the GOP can't seem to take advantage of it the way Democrats take advantage of their partisans in the media.

Posted by: Taleena at October 12, 2006 03:26 PM (6aS70)

9 Ok Eight! thats what I get for attempting to gloat.

Posted by: Taleena at October 12, 2006 03:28 PM (6aS70)

10 Neal Boortz is one of the more famous guys out there actively calling for Republican losses this year, as 'punishment' for their transgessions. This argument is easy to rebuff. Good old Neal will have no one to talk to.

If you're arguing they're not as guilty as they seem, and besides, we're just feeling bad because we're losing, I'd say it's this time exactly that we need to spit on our hands, hoist the flag, and begin slitting throats. There comes a time in any big game where it's easier to lose than muster the effort to win.

The judges may not ever get elected if we don't. Besides, I think when the MSM finally took off their masks in the last month, it's a sign they are particularly vulnerable. So take heart Ace; we haven't lost yet.

One other point you didn't mention. The conservative blogoshere's reaction to the MSM's timed onslaught to bring down Congress was unfortunately somewhat immature. We waffled and turned inward, and became self-incriminatory.

This is a big game for the cultural marbles and literally for the MSM's life as they know it. In later fights we might be more prepared for their nastiness and meet them with our flags hoisted and our knuckles already bloodied.

Posted by: Jacko at October 12, 2006 03:30 PM (g8n7f)

11 I'm dissatisfied with the GOP/RNC for being stupid enough to believe all the noise from DNC operatives pretending to be Republicans and buckling under the pressure of the MSM.

We would have had secure borders and reformed SocSec if our politicians and their staffs weren't so stupid.

Bush got relected with 51% of the vote. More than 60 million Americans supported Bush and his campaign promises. Congress was, of course, bamboozled to believe the opposite. They ran away from the issues to not be unpopular.

They ran away from Hastert when he was in the thick-of-it, too. Republicans know how to cut-and-run from political pressure.

Posted by: Bart at October 12, 2006 03:32 PM (fUnVH)

12 Count me as one of those who is dissatisfied with the prosecution of the war, and related issues.

Spongeworthy is delusional. Our enemies, putative and current, know they can indeed fuck with us, which is why our current enemies are fucking with us.

Posted by: Ed Snate at October 12, 2006 03:33 PM (GqXHW)

13

You neglect to mention that neither the administration nor the Congress has made anything more than token efforts on social issues.  Where's the Federal Marriage Amendment, the Human Life Amendment, effort to overturn Lawrence v. Texas?  So-called conservatives are pushing extreme social agendas that no liberal would have dared just a few years ago.

This is a security issue as well, as the jihadis will start recruiting Americans who are disgusted by the decadence of large swaths of the culture.

Posted by: Gregg at October 12, 2006 03:34 PM (oEPIN)

14 I would take full-on communism and socialism over hypocrtical, half-baked conservativism. I would take cowardly pacicifism versus fighting a weak war on terror. I would take no borders versus weak borders. I would take an aggressive approach versus gun owners, christians and conservatives versus a weak approach to terrorism. I would rather see a ban on talk radio and right-wing blogs instead of weak attempts to limit sharia law.

True conservatives and libertarians vote Democrat, even though the Dems hate you.

Posted by: Conservative or liberal Moby? at October 12, 2006 03:34 PM (Gi7oA)

15 Whenever I find myself second-guessing the political skills of the GOP leadership, I just remind myself that in the last 3 elections they have won the presidency twice and retained control of the house and senate 3 times, depite the best efforts of an increasingly rabid and mendacious MSM. Then I relax, and trust that all will be well.

Posted by: quiggs at October 12, 2006 03:38 PM (rXafI)

16 Enh. Can't say I'm hugely discouraged with the party over Iraq, especially as the particulars of that problem were the result of decisions made by a group of people much smaller than the party as a whole. The party as a whole endorsed a doctrine, not a specific plan, and I still agree with the doctrine.

Corruption? Enh. Maybe i'm just jaded, but not too terribly upset about this one.


BCRA?
Immigration?
Bugfuck squirrelnoise whijji whijji incoherent spittleflecked puppystrangling pissed.
These are not failings. They are broken faith, betrayals of principles, ancestors, and ideals. They're the ones that caused me to split, even as flirt back and forth with the idea of returning to the fold.


The first is, I think, pretty self-explanatory.
The second is just so transparent. It gives the lie, it proves our team is bought. (Not all of it, but enough.)

That's the depressing thing. Not the greed or the corruption or whatever so much as the realization that there's nowhere left to go.

The terrorists cannot take this country from us. But you better believe John McCain can. If the man is elected president, we will be a poorer, more illiterate, more fractured, and in every way lessened country 10 years hence.

And the best part is, after BCRA 2, you won't even be able to complain about it.



Posted by: jdubious at October 12, 2006 03:40 PM (G7s9a)

17 Professor Blather:

Take heart:

Contrary to MSM reports, the question of troop numbers has been debated intensely for years by the Pentagon. The reason 500k troops aren't there is because the overwhelming concern is that it must be seen by the world and the Iraqi's that THEY stand up; we must never 'occupy' the country. You won't hear that in the MSM, but go read Rumsfeld or the Pentagon.

In the first term Bush made the news, and in the second the MSM did. The same old Bush is still there. He just has all the megaphones aimed at him; the second term victory was the last straw for them. Getting another Republican in the Presidency will be very difficult forever now. You are watching the new MSM this fall; everyone's pulling a Dan Rather of obfuscation.

Posted by: Jacko at October 12, 2006 03:43 PM (g8n7f)

18

I think part of the problem is the "Washington bubble".

I remember Bush was interviewed early on in his presidency, and was asked if he ever reads political rags like Weekly Standard, or National Review, listen to talk radio, read the blogs, and he said no. And I remember thinking, "not good"  How do you get the pulse of the nation by living in a bubble?

And the Republicans in congress, always on the defensive, acting like they're the minority party....why? Is it because they're surrounded by a liberal point of view esp. in the media? Rush often says that congressmen endorse the fashionable, "progressive" ideas so they can be invited to all the cocktail parties. I usually scoff at that. But maybe there's something to it. I don't know.

Posted by: Nice Deb at October 12, 2006 03:45 PM (9ftXk)

19 The conservatives were dazzled by winning, by his brash style, by his born again faith, and by his down-home, kick-assedness. Mostly, they fell in love when he picked up a bullhorn and echoed Reagan and the Evil Empire.

But that can only mask unbridled spending (and a massive new prescription drug entitlement), moderate immigration policy, and a messy war for so long.

On the last issue, Victor Davis Hanson hits the nail on the head, even though a shitload of conservatives who have bolted from Wolfowitzand back to the breast of Kissinger deny it:

"Everything that needs to be said about Iraq has. Long gone is any surprise that most current critics of the war were its one-time boosters, much less that it matters much.

Still, a book will be written about the public fickleness of prominent columnists, pundits, politicians, and TV talking heads and hosts, who now damn our efforts, but once were gung-ho in their support of removing Saddam—and crowed as much when the statue fell.

My rule of thumb is that almost every current, know-it-all critic, whether a Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Chris Matthews (“we are all neo-cons now”), Francis Fukuyama, etc., at one time or another voiced support for removing Saddam and bringing war to Iraq.

One constant in their various escape hatches is that a particular lapse, a certain mistake alone explains their abandonment of earlier zeal—too few troops, disbanding the Iraqi army, not trisecting the country, the tenure of Donald Rumsfeld, etc.

In contrast, the simple truth is too bitter to confess: their support follows the pulse of the battlefield. When the statue fell and approval for the war hovered near 80%, few wanted to be on the wrong side of history. But fast forward three years plus: after well over 2,000 battle deaths, and chaos in Iraq, most not only don’t wish to be associated with the stasis, but contort to assure that they never supported the war in the beginning (hard to do with footprints on the internet), or were supposedly betrayed by the incompetence of others."

This is hard shit. And Americans don't like doing hard shit. Especially 20 year hard shit.

As for conservative Americans, the wages of doing hard shit also releases their natural inclination that the Iraqis and the rest of the Muslim world are all a bunch of lunatics and barbarians, so why are our boys dying for them?


Posted by: Hoke at October 12, 2006 03:47 PM (5HveT)

20 So, your brilliant analysis is that we're too chickenshit to win.

Baloney.

Endless MSM drumbeat + domestic sell-out (Miers, which really started this + immigration + lack of progress on any other issues) + perception that Bush isn't going to do anything more or fight back = despair

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 03:49 PM (aR/3d)

21 I'm not down on the Republicans so much as I am down on how incredibly stupid such a large part of the population is. Which leads to a feeling of hopelessness. I mean, if these guys, these murdering Islamofacists, aren't enough to motivate a united response, what the hell could be?

And pardon me, but I do think the reason we haven't moved on Iran, and maybe North Korea, is that Bush knows the population won't stand for it. It's the right thing, but he can't do it. And he can't do it because of the Hairy Durbans of the world whining that we are torturing people at Abu Graib, a claim bordering on delusion.

I'm also disappointed that the Reps are too damned nice. They don't do this pre-election Foley shit. (Remember W's DWI?) Look at Harry Reid, this land deal is 10 times more scandalous than the Foley reaction could have been, for God's sake Foley resigned, and the Dems were sitting on the story at least as much as the Reps.

And yet the Clintons get up there and lay on the smooth. Everyone relax, we're here now, just sit back and let us manage everything. Good grief.

I'm going to vote, I'm going to participate, I have contributed to some tight races. I even think the Reps will keep both houses, and by a decent margin. When the chips are down the people will know good, substantive leadership from bad. But sometimes I do feel like a good rant.

Posted by: Gotta Know at October 12, 2006 03:51 PM (39TwW)

22 Ah, the sell-out.

Never gets old, does it?

Posted by: Hoke at October 12, 2006 03:52 PM (5HveT)

23

Conservatives are NOT a majority.  They are, at best, a plurality of about 35%, and are probably edged for the title of plurality by moderates/independents.  (Depending on what week it is.)

You can't expect a nation which is NOT majority conservative to govern as if it were majority conservative.

Conservatives can only win by compromising with right-leaning moderates.  Until there actually is a conservative majority, you have to be realistic and expect a *moderately* conservative government, a center-right coalition.

 

Posted by: ace at October 12, 2006 03:52 PM (4qddO)

24 And let's not forget, in this mess, that the president's immigration plan was to call an amnesty.

Posted by: jdubious at October 12, 2006 03:53 PM (G7s9a)

25 This is hard shit. And Americans don't like doing hard shit. Especially 20 year hard shit. ... As for conservative Americans, the wages of doing hard shit also releases their natural inclination that the Iraqis and the rest of the Muslim world are all a bunch of lunatics and barbarians, so why are our boys dying for them?

Yep. Exactly.

But I do still believe in the mission ... despite my undying frustration that not enough of those mythical "moderate Muslims" are stepping up to the plate and saving their own country.

I can handle the "hard shit." But I'd much prefer some plain talk. To hear the GOP leaders explain it just about how you just did.

We can do "hard shit" - but I'm not sure we are doing it right now. I think we're trying to find some middle ground, and being hit by both sides.

So let's do it.

And let's find GOP leaders who actually lead the way.

I'm convinced that - despite the spending and immigration fiascos - Bush/GOP numbers could skyrocket in a month if somebody in the party, preferably Dubya, showed that kind of leadership.

I know they're capable of it. I know it's what people want and need. I just don't understand what happened to that leadership.

Posted by: Professor Blather at October 12, 2006 03:54 PM (MOAQd)

26

someone,

You noticed the reversals on Miers and immigration, I trust?

Dude, you *won* on those.


Further, those were both BUSH's idea.  It was actually GOP congressmen who thwarted them (pushed by us, of course).


You're going to punish the the GOP congressmen for thwarting dumb moves by Bush?

 

Posted by: ace at October 12, 2006 03:54 PM (4qddO)

27 Ace is correct. That reality, however, often gets conservatives screaming for the heads of backstabbers and sell-outs like Chafee, Specter, Snowe, Collins, McCain.

They want more Brown- and less wet-backs!

Posted by: Hoke at October 12, 2006 03:55 PM (5HveT)

28 No, I'm not going to punish Congress. I'm just saying, what we got in results we lost in trust.

I'm not sure this "bad mood" is actually going to hurt the party much anyway.

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 03:57 PM (aR/3d)

29 I am dissatisfied because WE WON AND WE STILL CAN'T GET ANYTHING DONE. And I wonder if it's because our party is as crooked as the other one.

For example:

1. Closing the borders. The conservative base has been loudly screaming for this for 5 years. It makes perfect sense. What have we gotten? Plans for a 700 mile fence five years later, which many believe will never actually be built. Why?

The only answer I can see is corruption. Someone is making a lot of money with open borders. They won't be closed. (Who are our multi billionnaire drug dealers, by the way? We know by first name the ones south of the border. What, do you think we don't have them? Do you think Acosta comes over here with 16 billion nickel bags and personally sells them on the street? Or do we have a few multi billionnaires over here as well? Who are they? Just askin'.)

2. Why hasn't Dubya pressed to get the lower court judges confirmed? WHY? We are the majority Party, Goddammit! We can't get them confirmed.

3. This one really gets me. http://pajamasmedia.com/2006/09/oil_indepedence_day_in_the_fut.php

This article came out in May 2005. According to this, we already have the technology to wean our sorry asses from those murderous bastards in the Middle East who are funding the Jihad, but we don't. Again, WHY? Corruption is the only answer I come up with. Someone's making a lot of money by keeping the status quo.

4. Why don't we deal with the UN? PLEASE? I am severely insulted that the clown from Venezuela and the idiot from Iran can come to our country and insult us and our President.

It simply leaves me with the notion that I can't trust my party any more than I can trust the other one. That really pisses me off.

Posted by: Foxy Wizard at October 12, 2006 04:00 PM (rgDma)

30 The last time the GOP had a bad mood, the GOP was out of control of the House for around 30 years. Since the Dems had their last bad mood, they've been out of control for 12 years.

This theory that by failure, we can purge our weak elements is brilliant.

Posted by: Hoke at October 12, 2006 04:00 PM (5HveT)

31 I take it, Ace, that you are setting aside the "God's Own Party" attitude with the bullshit wedge issues that are tossed out as if they matter more than oh say securing the borders? I agree with much that has been said here in the comments about fatigue, on the war, etc., but you are letting the GOP in Congress off too lightyl IMO.

1. Borders: the GOP never made a move on this during most of the 5 years after 9/11 and when it did it was only because their base was so outraged they really had no choice. Of course they've also done their best to water-down the fence bill as well.

2. Spending: the GOP has rolled over for just about every spending item on the president's list with little or no thought to reigning in a runaway budget. Sorry, you can shift this to Bush or even the Dems all you like but the GOP has controlled Congress and they have zero excuse for not exercising their legislative powers in this. I blame the GOP for the spending, period.

The sad part is that the Dems I believe would be far worse in almost everything that the GOP has ticked me off on, butI grow weary of having to vote for the lesser of two evils. That gets old after awhile. I may feel compelled to do so, yet again, next month but at this point I'm not sure. At what point do we say enough is enough?

Posted by: John at October 12, 2006 04:02 PM (tROri)

32 Ace, excellent post. I think you make a number of good points, but there are a couple of things I'd like to add.

1. I think all of us who supported Operation Iraqi Freedom are disappointed with how the aftermath has gone. At enormous cost and sacrifice we have released Iraq from the iron grip of an evil man and given it the chance to establish a free and democratic government.

Yet what we see is continuing chaos and violence, only part of which can be blamed on jihadists and Iran/Syria. It is true that the msm filters out the good news and overplays the bad news, but the reality is that Iraq is not free from internal 'power-play' violence. And it's also true that this violence could not be happening without at least passive support from large numbers of Iraqis.

So yes, we're depressed about Iraq. But I think we're even more depressed about the failure of the Muslim world to make any effort to join the 19th century, let alone the 21st. All around the world, wherever Muslims are, we see violence or the threat of violence right below the surface, joined with total intolerance and bigotry.

I sometimes feel that the possibility of reforming the Muslim world just appears to be a hopeless cause. And if it is hopeless, then probably our continued efforts in Iraq are a waste of time.

I am still not ready to give up, if only because it would be a betrayal of all of the Afgans and Iraqis who have worked so hard to try to make democracy and freedom work, but there times when I get discouraged, not so much because of what's going on Iraq and Afganistan, but because of what I see happening in response to cartoons, the Pope etc etc etc.

Or in other words, we may lose in Iraq, but it won't be because of us or mistakes we made, it will be because the Muslim world is hopeless and will have to be contained, not reformed, and if it can't be contained, hurt bad enough that it decides to contain itself.

2. You don't mention the msm. We are all aware of how biased and dishonest the msm is, and we tune it out.

However, it still as an insiduous effect on all of us, and it still to a large extent frames the debate. Think of how much time you and others on the net spend rebuting the msm's lies, pointing out the msm's double standards and just generally dealing with the msm's hatred of President Bush and Republicans (to say nothing of the US itself) instead of trying to move forward and help create and support the best agenda for this country.

Or to say it another way, because of the msm, Republicans spend a lot of time playing defense when they shouldn't have to. And we see only the Republicans' problems (some of which are self-inflcted) and not the very real achievements which you pointed out.

If anyone reads this far, I give you props in advance.

Posted by: max at October 12, 2006 04:04 PM (xwiLF)

33 Foxy is an exemplar of the malignancy. Demands that borders be closed, though that may not be feasible, it may be economically unwise, Bush disagrees, and so do many Republicans in the Senate.

Then a bitch about the courts, even with Alito and Roberts and rock-solid support of conservative nominees, including constant resubmission, recess appointments, and a crafty compromise that knee-capped the Democrats for future nominees and got Owen, Rogers Brown and severla other in. Nope - Bush is a bad because the Senate GOP didn't go nuclear.

Now, it is bomb the U.N. and "backstabbers" and corruption.

Posted by: at October 12, 2006 04:05 PM (5HveT)

34 On the Iraq/foreign side, I agree 100% with Hoke (which is scary, since I've long been certain he's really you).

But I think there's another element -- it's the sense of impotence bred because we haven't done anything and don't look like we're going to do anything. Forget about Iraq; no matter how well that is or could have been going there are and would be still big next steps to protect our lives that we're nowhere close to taking. (Like, uh... Iran?)

The right, despite the whole conservative thing, is pretty consistently in favor of doing something (decisive) when threatened. And the great war -- the threat -- is still raging worldwide (and still would be if every sectarian militia in Iraq had been disbanded yesterday). So why aren't we doing anything? Even conservative complaints ostensibly about Iraq are along these same lines...

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 04:06 PM (aR/3d)

35 I disagree. I think the dissatisfaction stems more from a lack of leadership and principal than anything else.

What has been the agenda since 2004? Either the house repub agenda, the senate repub agenda, or the White House agenda? I'm not sure there is one. It has all been reactionary and generally has seemed anti-conservative. We, as conservatives, have had to fight hard to STOP ridiculous bills being passed that are so far from our principals as to be ridiculous. This, when we (or at least the GOP) control all 3 branches.

Instead of seeing a conservative agenda set and pursued (even were it not ultimately successful), the agenda seems almost random, and even seems controlled by the dems at times. Plus, all 3 branches are reactionary to the press and can't seem to get a message out.

That's the last 2 years. Now, add to that this election cycle, where the repubs aren't even bothering to put forth any kind of forward/positive conservative agenda. Instead, they run entirely on "you don't want dems to win". Instead of running on a positive conservative agenda, they are running on "we're not as bad as they are".

Those things, added together, are demoralizing. When you add in all of the other failures - spending, No Child Left Behind, Medicare Plan B, Campaign Finance, etc., I believe conservatives are starting to feel like there is no point, no hope - that ultimately even if we win control, nothing changes and the liberal agenda marches on. We feel like our leaders have given up, and that leads us to be demoralized.

then, add to that the fatigue of the 24/7 media criticism and outright lying about conservatives, etc., and you have fatigue added to demorilization.

We thought there would be progress. Some of us conservatives understood that progress would be slow, that the fight would have to continue, but we expected to see progress. The response is always the same to this - but 9/11 changed everything, the War on Terror trumps everything else.

Well, first, I would argue that the handling of the War on Terror could be better. Second, why does the War on Terror mean that we have to cede ALL domestic issues to the liberals? I don't understand that thinking.

So, when the only thing being offered to a conservative is "vote republican, they may be bad, and may betray all conservative principals, but they are still better than democrats" you generally are going to have low morale.

Does this mean I think a large number of conservatives will stay home on election day? I don't know, but I would not be surprised.

In economics, it would be called the law of diminishing returns. I.e., we keep voting for the republicans b/c they claim to be conservative to some extent, but each time we do vote for them, we get less and less for our vote.

- GB

Posted by: Great Banana at October 12, 2006 04:06 PM (JFj6P)

36 "At what point do we say enough is enough? "

Ummm, never?

If you can point out to any historical incidences of governments governing in perfect fidelity to conservative principles (which, by the way, even conservatives can't agree on), then I'll say yes, we should push again for such a magical time in history.

If not, then I'd say you have to stop having silly expectations about a government doing precisely what you want it to do.

I doubt there's been a single person on planet earth who's ever said, "You know, my govenrment is governing PRECISELY the way I'd like it to."

Posted by: ace at October 12, 2006 04:07 PM (4qddO)

37 This is getting OT, but were you guys now righteously complaining about "spending" raising holy hell when your Congresscritters pre-emptively caved to the left on private SS accounts?

Because pork is a droplet of a droplet compared to the ocean of entitlements.

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 04:10 PM (aR/3d)

38 Our Reeps in Congress are simply too afraid of being accused of right-wing extemism. So they do nothing.

Like Rush says, the Liberal's plan is to stigmatize and eventually outlaw Conservatism.

The Dems scream bloody murder every time the Reeps try to advance our agenda. Through conditioning, the Reeps in Congress are shellshocked and won't even attempt advancing the agenda.

Posted by: Bart at October 12, 2006 04:10 PM (gf/BH)

39

The Iraq war seemed like a great idea at the time. Righteous anger following 9/11, Saddam's a dick and it's time to go, WMD aplenty, bi-partisan support.

Except we didn't find the WMD we thought we might. We were looking for warehouses packed full of deadly shit, and found some minor stuff in a guy's car, so to speak.

The time to cut our losses in Iraq has come and gone by more than 2 years. We're stuck with it now. We were spoiled by The 100 Hour War- and now that we have a long slog, most people just want the fuckin' thing to be over. That it isn't over is huge- politically.

And Bush can't end it. Not under the terms for victory he's laid out. Bush will have to hand off. The next President is going to inherit Iraq. He's gonna have to run on how he's gonna end it- you know, have 'a secret plan to end the war.'

'04 and '08 may be the biggest shit sandwich we've ever had to bite.

Posted by: Barry at October 12, 2006 04:11 PM (kKjaJ)

40 Interestingly, the demand for absolute fealty to conservative principles (with the attendant whine of backstabbing and being sold out) comes when it looks like the GOP is about to get hammered. I love it when rats leave a sinking ship . . . on principle.

Posted by: Hoke at October 12, 2006 04:11 PM (5HveT)

41 06 and 08 sorry

Posted by: Barry at October 12, 2006 04:11 PM (kKjaJ)

42 fuck off hoke- DU needs the snot rags swept up

Posted by: Barry at October 12, 2006 04:12 PM (kKjaJ)

43 This post leads to a bigger question than the sour mood among the Republicans: do we still support the war in Iraq?

I'm half decided that we can't build a Democracy in a Muslim country. Fascism and Democracy don't mix.

Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at October 12, 2006 04:12 PM (6+p6K)

44 I think its more a case of hyper expectations than poor performance. I'm not saying the Repubs have been perfect, far from it. But in today's world of instant gratification and intstant news, we expect to get what we want, exactly what we want, and we want it now.

I think whatever party is in power in the coming years is going to suffer from this sort of burnout.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 12, 2006 04:13 PM (rnOZq)

45 Yeah, that's a big question.

I waver on it.

Posted by: ace at October 12, 2006 04:14 PM (4qddO)

46 My malaise is a combination of a growing, grim realization that our experiment in building a modern Islamic nation in Iraq may be doomed to failure and that this failure is going to force us to unpleasant choices; and the fact that after the tough sledding in Iraq, there's Iran, Syria and NoKo waiting on deck. Oh, and minimal help from our "friends" in Europe.

I was on board with deposing Saddam, but skeptical about nation building. But I recognized that it was a path that had to be taken if we ever wanted to transcend containment and despot "wack-a-mole". I hoped for the best. 3 years in and its looking more like "the worst". And that ain't Bush's fault per se, but it does bring a fella down.

Congress? That's more like a zero sum game where I just think we can't afford to lose, regardless of the feckless BS we have to swallow when we "win". Failure is not an option, as Alexeya says.

Posted by: AFKAF at October 12, 2006 04:15 PM (DXjVU)

47 Jack makes a great point. There are inevitable political recessions as well.

Posted by: Ace at October 12, 2006 04:15 PM (5HveT)

48 It isn't any one thing. It's everything. I don't get the impression these guys really beleive any of this crap. They're insincere. They do not share my values.

If Ted Kennedy was running in Indiana he'd claim he was pro-life and supports tax cuts.

If Bill Frist had to win in Massachusetts he'd be pro-choice and support terrorists rights.

They're mostly just saying what they think they need to get elected.

It's the whole kit and kaboodle. These guys have no core values to speak of. They're only there to serve themselves, and that's all you can ever rely on them to do when you're not pinning them down and twisting thier arm - and even then they find the minimalist way to get you off them and go back to where they were.

That's why I'm down on the GOP.

Posted by: Entropy at October 12, 2006 04:16 PM (m6c4H)

49 If it's true -- if -- that Iraq can never be made into a decent state, then the liberals are, I guess, right about pulling up stakes and redeploying to neighboring Okinawa.

I'm not convinced of that, though.

And, even if I were, there are so many Al Qaeda in Iraq it's a good hunting ground.

They have to be defeated, whether Muslims are capable of real democracy or not.

Posted by: ace at October 12, 2006 04:16 PM (4qddO)

50 Hoke,

Interestingly, the demand for absolute fealty to conservative principles (with the attendant whine of backstabbing and being sold out) comes when it looks like the GOP is about to get hammered. I love it when rats leave a sinking ship . . . on principle.

I'm not sure that is a fair or accurate description of what people are saying. for instance, where in what I wrote, do you draw that conclusion from?

I think what everyone has to realize is that the republican party - while the more conservative party - is NOT a Conservative party. We (conservatives) vote for republicans b/c they are CLOSER to our philosophy than democrats. Thus, the GOP is never entitled to a conservative's vote. They must earn such a vote. You seem to believe the opposite is true.

Posted by: Great Banana at October 12, 2006 04:17 PM (JFj6P)

51 Consider if conservatives had your malaise after the Berlin Airlift. It's been 3 and a half years, and the patient suffers his most extreme reaction to a vaccine early, not late.

And tough choices abound whether we stay in or bug out of Iraq.

Posted by: Hoke at October 12, 2006 04:18 PM (5HveT)

52 On the Spending Issue...

Let's not forget, the budget passed, was $132 Billion LESS than what Democrats WANTED.

And, of course, bein's they're not the majority, it's EASY to try to pin ALL the spending on the other Party.

In the world of Congressional compromise, by extrapolation, that would mean, that IF Republicans had've gotten EVERYTHING they wanted, the budget would've been $264 Billion less, and the deficit would be near 2% or less.

jis' sayin'

Posted by: franksalterego at October 12, 2006 04:20 PM (aWLTJ)

53 Remember Bill Clinton's tirade against Chris Wallace? Where's that passion on the Right? Only the Right won't have to lie through their teeth to say "Look at the economy. Remember when you said the tax cuts would balloon the deficit? You were wrong as all fuck. Eat a dick."

A constant drumbeat on the good economy. A constant drumbeat on the fact that we've had no terrorist attacks (balanced with a constant drumbeat that that doesn't mean they can't happen). How come we're not seeing a lot of Republican Congresscritters going over to Iraq to highlight the good things?

Sitting around and moping that the MSM doesn't cover the good stuff is bush-league sour grapes loser-thinking. A delegation of Hastert, Frist and some other big-shots going to Iraqi Kurdistan to check on the progress there--that's news. If CBS won't cover it, Fox will.

Constant defense is where losers live. Winners take the fight to the enemy. Republicans don't do this because they still think they're the minority party and don't have the courage of their convictions. To hell with them.

Posted by: rho at October 12, 2006 04:20 PM (VMQj4)

54 As they say in the intelligence community, the conservative chatter on how dissatisfied they are with Bush and the GOP has risen their fortunes have fallen.

Some say the fortunes fell because of conservative dissatisfaction, but I'm not buying.

Posted by: GB at October 12, 2006 04:21 PM (5HveT)

55 Barry, you stupid fuck, the war's not about its political ramifications.

The rest of you: we've already created a modern Islamic democracy -- Kurdistan. But they had ten years, a lot of growing pains, and fewer regional powers and jihadis trying to stop them (because they rightly see a threat to their own continued existence).

Have some fucking patience.

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 04:22 PM (aR/3d)

56 And, even if I were, there are so many Al Qaeda in Iraq it's a good hunting ground.
They have to be defeated, whether Muslims are capable of real democracy or not.
Posted by ace at October 12, 2006 04:16 PM


Yeah, but if Muslims are incapable of Democracy, then everyone in Iraq and the ME is the enemy, and we're fighting them from the ground.

On the other hand, America is not ready to start nuking, so this is the best war we're allowed to fight.

The situation sucks.

Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at October 12, 2006 04:23 PM (6+p6K)

57 GB's last post was me, to GB.

I'm retarded.

Posted by: Hoke at October 12, 2006 04:23 PM (5HveT)

58 What is more for the first time, conservatives have a structure and a voice in the media and yet the GOP can't seem to take advantage of it the way Democrats take advantage of their partisans in the media.

So true. The GOP is getting marginally better, but not doing nearly enough. I sometimes think the White House should start bypassing the msm altogether and releasing news to talk radio and blogs only.

I also wish someone would develop an alternative to the Associated Press and Reuters, which I think of as cancer transporters for the msm.

This is a big game for the cultural marbles and literally for the MSM's life as they know it.

They more or less treated the 2004 election this way, but this time they're trying even harder, albiet a little more subtlely (no out-and-out forgeries so far).

I mean the whole Foleygate thing wasn't 'breaking news', it was planned ahead by ABC working with Soros/DNC.

On a different note, I often wonder what the political landscape would look like without Soros. It seems like his money, or the possibility of getting some of hs money down the road, via foundation employment or whatever, has purchased a huge portion of the Democratic party.

Should we start referring to the msm/DNC as the Soros/msm/DNC?

Posted by: max at October 12, 2006 04:24 PM (xwiLF)

59 *Newsflash*

The Iraq war is over. The war in Iraq ended three years ago.

Again, I repeat:

We are no longer at war with Iraq.

Iraq is now a front of the war against Islamofascists.

Posted by: Bart at October 12, 2006 04:24 PM (gf/BH)

60 Agreed, someone. We need some patience here. It's actually amazing how far we've come with Iraq. Imagine if Iran and the US got into a fight over Iraq like the US and the USSR did over Germany? Shit, I the cleanup wasn't handled all that smoothly, but we did (and are doing) some good stuff over there. Give it time and I think we'll have more brothers in democracy.

Posted by: CT at October 12, 2006 04:24 PM (KV/Mz)

61 Great Banana makes a great point. Elections in America aren't like Baskin and Robbins. More like Carvel. You can have either vanilla or chocolate.

Those of us who like vanilla are forced to choose to either eat Carvel's vanilla, even if we think its not a terribly good vanilla, or eat chocloate which gives us hives and the runs. And what pisses some of us off at times is that Carvel knows we love ice cream and they refuse to take our input on how to make their vanilla better.

Damn, shitty analogy.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 12, 2006 04:25 PM (rnOZq)

62 By the way, Ace, do you ever read the links I post?

I think the entire premise of this discussion may well be wrong, at least from the all-important electoral point of view.

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 04:26 PM (aR/3d)

63 Also, this is literally the best piece of news I've heard about 2008 all year. Excellent...

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 04:27 PM (aR/3d)

64 someone,

Ace rarely reads the comments or links from those of us who love him. So..don't hold your breath there.

Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at October 12, 2006 04:28 PM (qXasq)

65 Endless MSM drumbeat
Posted by someone at October 12, 2006 03:49 PM


A constant avalanche of negative headlines has something to do with it.

The lack of a conservative agenda has led to feelings of dissatisfaction, too, I think, at least on my part. They need to take another shot at privatizing s.s. or cutting taxes again, or making the current cuts permanent. It's been a while since we've had a clear conservative victory on something. The border issue wouldn't do the job because I think it splits conservatives.

Iraq hasn't been a big issue for me, unless I'm in denial. I think a lot of terrorists are dying and have died, which, as far as I'm concerned, could be our main objective there.

Posted by: slatz at October 12, 2006 04:29 PM (ig+yv)

66 For me, immigration was always the biggest issue -

War in Iraq? A plus for me and I've never bought the hype that we "f'd up" the occupation - overall I think we're doing okay at it, and frankly when you're talking about occupation as opposed to "war", "okay" is about as good as it gets esp in the broad view.

Spending? Yeah I guess but meanwhile the economy is booming, and the tax refunds however "small" were near and dear to my heart.

Corruption? Please, I wasn't born yesterday - business as frickin usual. Sure I'd love to see less pork and applaud any efforts on that front but it's small potatoes and once again not something I get very excited about.

Outside of that, after the Iraq War I haven't heard alot from the WH about the GWOT, so I try to be charitable and assume they're making some gains in secrecy, but when I see things like Dubai and the Gummint's non-handling of the borders and illegal aliens, it makes me wonder how seriously they take terrorism and whether they still have the balls to repeat the War in Iraq should the need arise - and the amnesty thing was mind blowing esp given that it's already been tried.

Now is it fair for me to hold the GOP accountable for what may (may) just be Bush's dumb move? Well, I give them some credit for his successes so why shouldn't they also share some of the blame? After all they are effectively on the same team, and need eachother to get most things done.

Posted by: Scott at October 12, 2006 04:29 PM (f8958)

67 There was a great piece, maybe in NRO, a few days ago, sorry I don't know who the author was, talking about Clausiwitz (sp) and his observations on war. Basically the idea was that by definition there will be pauses in wars of this duration and magnitude. They come from penetrating deep into enemy territory and expending the resources to do so. The supply lines take energy and resources to maintain; things seem to slow down; a day in the conflict is much less significant than it was at the very beginning when everyone was watching; and the enemy adapts more or less successfully to the intruding army.

But at some point a new leg is launched and everything is fine. Or not. But things change.

So our malaise is par for this course.

Posted by: Gotta Know at October 12, 2006 04:30 PM (39TwW)

68 I'm not down on the Republicans so much as I am down on how incredibly stupid such a large part of the population is.

That's it in a fucking nutshell. This war is going to be long and tough, and serious people never had any illusions otherwise. The problem is there are so many unserious people out there. The Iraq aftermath isn't going well, granted, but none of the alternatives are going to make things any better. The Dems bleat about Iraq because they are power hungry and unprincipled; the average American bleats about Iraq because he's possesses neither patience or a sense of historical perspective. Serious people know taking down Saddam was the right thing, and winning to war is not going to be easy. Unserious people wish it all away and pretend the threat is gone.

Posted by: UGAdawg at October 12, 2006 04:30 PM (d38jD)

69 How come we're not seeing a lot of Republican Congresscritters going over to Iraq to highlight the good things?

The ONLY politician who has any business on the battlefield is, the Commander-in-Chief.

All the rest are Photo-Ops, for Political Opportunists.

Posted by: franksalterego at October 12, 2006 04:31 PM (aWLTJ)

70 I missed this quote originallyWhat is more for the first time, conservatives have a structure and a voice in the media and yet the GOP can't seem to take advantage of it the way Democrats take advantage of their partisans in the media.Part of it (and I hate to keep bashing our host, seriously) may be that a lot of the right-aligned new media is made up of depressive worriers like Ace and Allah... I'm not going to forgive B+, but he does have a general point about this sort of thing.

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 04:32 PM (aR/3d)

71 Nothing wrong with your analogy, JackStraw. Which is why I protest so strongly with the current Republican theme, "vote for us unless you want to see Nancy Pelosi as Speaker, those meager tax cuts we compromised on, and no more handwaving on the matter of government spending".

Nothing keeps you from opening a Baskin-Robbins except believing that you're doomed from the start against Carvel.

Posted by: rho at October 12, 2006 04:33 PM (VMQj4)

72 Hmm. Never used the word "backstabbers", you who didn't care to identify yourself.

I am the malignency, huh?

Listen, the agreed upon number of illegal aliens in this country is 21 000 000. That's twenty one million. That's the agreed upon number. No one disputes it. My guess is it's probably many more.

How much does that cost us at the ER's of every hospital in the country?

How much does it cost us every time we have to educate someone who is here illegally?

Do you know what the number one given name is Texas has been for the last 3 years? Jose.

Did you not see the mass demonstrations of illegals demanding equal rights with citizens?

How many more schools do we have to build to educate these good people? How many more hospitals? Welfare offices?

And we can't afford to secure our borders?

Posted by: Foxy Wizard at October 12, 2006 04:33 PM (rgDma)

73 Buyer's remorse, my ass. I want the Republicans to start acting like leaders whom I gave a job to. Start kicking ass and taking names in Iraq. I'm tired of being nice to a bunch of ungrateful ragheads who keep biting the hand that feeds them. When things go right, I want to hear about it. When things go wrong, I want to hear about it, and I want to know what you intend to do. Kick their ass harder is an acceptable answer. Just do it.

Quit playing at war and start winning it like our fathers did in WWII. Now move!

Subsunk

Posted by: Subsunk at October 12, 2006 04:35 PM (L52OI)

74 The lack of a conservative agenda has led to feelings of dissatisfaction, too, I think, at least on my part. They need to take another shot at privatizing s.s. or cutting taxes again, or making the current cuts permanentI agree totally with your general point, and about tax cuts. SocSec? We're going to have to do a lot of shaping the battlefield on that one first before going back to it.

But it's true, I don't see any domestic conservative agenda, nor much new stuff coming from the brains on this front. I guess war and security are using up all the oxygen?

If it weren't a local matter I'd suggest school choice, which is IMO *the* moral-deficit-exposing domestic issue for Dems today.

Posted by: someone at October 12, 2006 04:38 PM (aR/3d)

75 I guess war and security are using up all the oxygen?

They aren't exactly kicking ass there either, though. If that's all the oxygen they got to spend on either or both, then we need someone else.

Posted by: Entropy at October 12, 2006 04:41 PM (m6c4H)

76 See, that's where I think the analogy falls apart, rho. I don't believe it really is possible for just anyone to start their own movement in today's environment. The single biggest inhibitor being money.

The only people who have mounted serious 3rd party candidacies have boat loads of cash, usually their own, at their disposal. The two major parties know this and will spend an upstart into the ground.

Look at Lamont. He was, for all intents, an insurgent to the Dem party. He basically bankrolled his primary out of his own considerable pocket and is now getting pummeled by Repub money. In a Dem race!

Call me a sellout, but I would vote for a Repub that I liked mostly over a Dem I don't like at all if those are my only choices. They pretty much always are. And the Repubs know that.

Doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 12, 2006 04:42 PM (rnOZq)

77 Two words NO GAME. We've seen democrats capitilaize on every big story, while the GOP remains silent. Where were republicans when chavez called Bush the devil? I had to listen to CHARLIE RANGEL defend Bush! It takes Bush for-ever to respond to criticism, and when he does he comes off as kind of jerky. I'd like to see these guys put up SOME fight.

Posted by: BMAC at October 12, 2006 04:43 PM (BpygL)

78

someone at October 12, 2006 04:22 PM (aR/3d)

Eat shit and die. You don't think a war can be 'political'? How's the view from up your ass?

Posted by: Barry at October 12, 2006 04:44 PM (kKjaJ)

79

someone,


Do you ever read my blog?  I already linked the Warner story.

Rubber, glue.

 

Posted by: ace at October 12, 2006 04:49 PM (4qddO)

80 I think the thing that bothers me the most is our side just doesn't communicate clearly to the American People. We just don't get our point across. For example, it costs a lot of money to educate and give medical care to illegal aliens. Well, how much? Why can't we make our case with the facts? And say "look, we are a generous and giving people, but we can't afford this. Here's what we can afford..." and make a deal?

Posted by: Foxy Wizard at October 12, 2006 04:51 PM (rgDma)

81

BMAC,

It's not just "no game."  There are facts that are hard to finesse, like, well, "We're a long way from winning the war and a lot of the best Americans have died thusfar fighting it."

The war isn't lost, but it's not being won, at least not obviously.  That's a drag.

Posted by: ace at October 12, 2006 04:51 PM (4qddO)

82 The rest of you: we've already created a modern Islamic democracy -- Kurdistan.


Isnt that the part of Iraq thats full of terrorists launching attacks on Turkey?


As far as voting for this year well im probably not going to. When the GOP starts running people who are worth fighting for then i will start voting again.

And to the war in Iraq: They cant kick our asses out of the country but we cant seem to beat them. We're just sitting there day after day losing a soldier or two at a time.

My solution?

1)Secure our borders. Bar Muslim immigrants. Deport the Muslims that we have here now. No more student visas..

2)We should just take out any nation state who is hostile to the U.S. who is capable of producing WMD. Fuck rebuilding. I dont care how many terrrorists are in Iraq as long as Iraq isnt able to produce weapons that can cause us serious damage.



Posted by: Crusading Amish at October 12, 2006 04:52 PM (OEbrS)

83 Amen, B-Mac. Charlie and Nancy defending Dubya? Pleeeze! And no one on our side? How did we get beat on that?

Posted by: Foxy Wizard at October 12, 2006 04:53 PM (rgDma)

84 Do you ever read my blog?

I don't read it. I just look at the pictures.

By the way, how about some more pics of FLYING CARS and GODZILLA? Me like them.

Posted by: bartwing plover at October 12, 2006 04:53 PM (gf/BH)

85 Amish for President.

Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at October 12, 2006 04:58 PM (6+p6K)

86 Ross Perot, while rich, didn't spend a lot of his own money. IIRC. He didn't have much of a message or core principles, and mostly ran on the goodwill generated by a sympathetic (emphasis on "pathetic") Larry King.

Ross gave us two terms of Bill Clinton, but when the Republicans were really down, they focussed on their principles and pushed their way into power in 1994 with an awful lot of first-timers with not much money and less political experience.

It can be done, but it won't get done if you're more driven by fear than principles. With fear, it's the preacher who has the power--with principles, it's you who calls the shots.

Posted by: rho at October 12, 2006 05:00 PM (VMQj4)

87 Where were republicans when chavez called Bush the devil? I had to listen to CHARLIE RANGEL defend Bush! It takes Bush for-ever to respond to criticism, and when he does he comes off as kind of jerky. I'd like to see these guys put up SOME fight.

Why would anyone want to dignify anything Hugo Chavez says?

Posted by: franksalterego at October 12, 2006 05:03 PM (aWLTJ)

88 I understand that conservatives have to take the high ground, but just once I'd like to see a republican POLITICIAN, step the eff up and show some OUTRAGE. Every body's outraged but republicans. We want some backbone. Why dignify chavez comments? Because he said it at the UN. Somebody (GOP) shoulda addressed it.

Posted by: BMAC at October 12, 2006 05:33 PM (BpygL)

89 "the agreed upon number of illegal aliens in this country is 21 000 000. That's twenty one million. That's the agreed upon number. No one disputes it."

?!?

Posted by: Knemon at October 12, 2006 05:37 PM (LgEUS)

90 "Isnt that the part of Iraq thats full of terrorists launching attacks on Turkey?"

Not really. The PKK (Kurdish Worker's Party) is mostly based out of eastern Turkey. While I'm sure they have contacts and support in Iraq, it's not "full of" them.

Posted by: Knemon at October 12, 2006 05:40 PM (LgEUS)

91 How is it that a war that does not require the actual participation of 99% of the country's population and in over 5 yrs accrued less casualties than a single day of serious combat in WW II be so taxing that some people in the right actually contemplate about losing it.

This war is not some intellectual exercise to be constantly nit-picked over. War came to America because our enemies thought we were effete and ripe for picking. Electing Democrats to show our discontent is really engaging in some serious denials. Are some in the right so afraid that they just really want the whole war thing to go away, to want someone to whisper some sweet nothings to their ears that it's ok to sit this war out.

Don't like the current administration? Would electing Democrats offer any improvements over national security, illegal immigration, health care, public spending and a host of other issues. Is it really doable to deport the millions of illegals in country now or are we really so cavaliar holding power that we want to alienate a whole voting bloc. Do we really have a majority if the RINOs hijack the agenda for their own selfish gains.

I think a part of the right intellengsia is still treating this war and every issue as some sort of intellectual exercise. They have spent so much time out of power and in their ivory towers that they don't see the realties required to hold and exercise power.

Nit-picking the war or other issues to burnish one's conservative credentials is not what's need now. Work on electing more Republicians to marginalize the RINOs is the real way to success. Harping on the sidelines is vainglorious preening.

Posted by: canuck at October 12, 2006 06:03 PM (dOOjm)

92 Ummm, never?

I cannot accept that. This country was founded by people saying enough is enough, and just about every political shake-up since then has been for similiar reasons.

If not, then I'd say you have to stop having silly expectations about a government doing precisely what you want it to do. I doubt there's been a single person on planet earth who's ever said, "You know, my govenrment is governing PRECISELY the way I'd like it to."

I do not expect perfection or even any political group doing "precisely" what I want, but I certainly do expect more than what the GOP has been giving.


Posted by: John at October 12, 2006 06:09 PM (tROri)

93 Interestingly, the demand for absolute fealty to conservative principles (with the attendant whine of backstabbing and being sold out) comes when it looks like the GOP is about to get hammered. I love it when rats leave a sinking ship . . . on principle.

Oh please, you make snide remarks worthy of a Kossack. Ask yourself WHY the GOP looks to perhaps being hammered. It didn't just happen overnight, this discontent has been brewing for quite awhile. Perfection is not what most people expect, yet something better than what the GOP has been doing would be nice.

Posted by: John at October 12, 2006 06:14 PM (tROri)

94 I think whatever party is in power in the coming years is going to suffer from this sort of burnout.

Historically this does seem to be the case: the party in power usually loses seats during midterms because of this with very few exceptions.

Posted by: John at October 12, 2006 06:17 PM (tROri)

95 If it's true -- if -- that Iraq can never be made into a decent state, then the liberals are, I guess, right about pulling up stakes and redeploying to neighboring Okinawa.

Actually if it's true than survival calls for measures most Americans would find unpleasant. It would mean the end of 'nation-buiding' and a return of brutal tactics of such ancient powers as the Romans: wholesale slaughter of the enemy without mercy, the enslavement and deportation of any survivors, and finally the razing to the ground of their cities (salting the ground afterwards a la Carthage of course). I hope such is not the case because that is something I prefer remain in the past where it belongs. This of course presumes a failure of nation-building would push the West into a corner and it's still capable of such a wounded animal reaction.

Posted by: John at October 12, 2006 06:24 PM (tROri)

96 I would take full-on communism and socialism over hypocrtical, half-baked conservativism.

Let me be the first to offer you a free one-way ticket to Zimbabwe or Cuba. The only condition is that you never return.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at October 12, 2006 06:36 PM (uLMbH)

97 Perot may or may not have spend much of his own money, I haven't seen the details. But he sure used his power and position in much the same way. He was on a lot more than Larry King including 60 Minutes and his own infomercials.

But, as you say, after he helped deflate the Repubicans, new entrants came into the system. As Republicans. So if your saying that the only way to get new and better Republicans is to see the ones in power lose, I would agree.

But there is no guarantee they would win in the next decade and frankly, I'm not sure we are in a position right now to risk a decade of Dem leadership which is far worse. It's not fear, it's experience. At least in my case.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 12, 2006 06:47 PM (rnOZq)

98 At least the GOP made significant progress on its battle against internet poker. That crucial piece of legislation addresses the most dangerous threat to our nation.

Posted by: steve_in_hb at October 12, 2006 06:53 PM (Wrfzz)

99 Buncha pussies, that's the problem.
All the negativity driven by the MSM truly has an effect on even the most staunch patriots.
The President has said that this is the first battle in a long war. He is correct.
Sadly, people tend to forget that the best laid plans go up in smoke when the first shot is fired.
Iraq hasn't been perfect?
Afghanistan either?
Big fucking deal.
The ball is moving forward. We are adjusting as we go, learning, adapting, improving.
Meanwhile, the enemy has been dying in record numbers, and terror plots are being stopped around the world, in spite of MSM treason.
Oh yeah, can I gets me some more cowbell???
Fucking pussies.
Suck it up, realize that the fight we're in now would be exponentially worse if we hadn't started fighting when we did, and that our country, in spite of liberal lies and whining, is in great fucking shape.
Pussies.

Posted by: Uncle Jefe at October 12, 2006 07:23 PM (vh+iP)

100 It's simple: frustration. For the last 3 national elections, we keep saying "one more chance, straighten up and act conservative, show us you deserve the chance." We've looked at them have all the power they need to get everything done that needs to be done and... do almost none of it, but spend huge stacks of cash to send home. We've seen them become corrupt and stupid and wasteful and waffle on important issues, we've seen them fail to pull the trigger when it was needed, fail to stand up for what we believe, and fail to oppose what we dislike. Basically people are saying "well we said you had one last chance, and you blew it." Personally I think that's a mistake, but it's an understandable one.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at October 12, 2006 09:41 PM (FuM7z)

101 Before we slash our wrists and invest heavily in Alcoa stock, maybe we should look at this first.

It has the republicans holding the house by 5 seats and the senate being a draw.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at October 12, 2006 10:20 PM (uLMbH)

102 This happens every presidential cycle when its the second term. happened to Clinton, Reagan.

The leadership gets tired. They are lame ducks. The media has found some dirt and people are tired.

It's like the 7 year itch (hmmm)

Before anyone gets too down on Iraq consider:

It's not even near Vietnam.
The Iraqi army is respected and already pretty large.
Most of the violence now is sectarian.
It's very hard to nation-build.


Look at Afghanistan...the famous Brits and Canadians aren't doing so well either - IT'S HARD WORK and yeah, the Pashtuns are always going to be a problem.

Posted by: Aaron at October 13, 2006 12:00 AM (6GWWi)

103 Oh, and yes, the MSM reporting on Iraq is bound to make anyone depressed. It's not their bias so much as a symbiotic cycle with the terrorists.

WTF wasn't Tenet fired years earlier?

Posted by: Aaron at October 13, 2006 12:01 AM (6GWWi)

104 Suck it up, realize that the fight we're in now would be exponentially worse if we hadn't started fighting when we did, and that our country, in spite of liberal lies and whining, is in great fucking shape.
Pussies.

Posted by: Uncle Jefe at October 12, 2006 07:23 PM (vh+iP) ---------I agree. However I think the MSM and Hollywood have had a devastating influence on conservatives. Consider how much of the "entertainment"  on t.v., movies, and music is extremely opposed to Bush. You can hardly watch a t.v. program without at least one editorial coment deriding Bush. The left is very effective at influencing emotions,  and in fact most of their politics and programs are often only about emotions. I don't think that anyone looking at October 2006 from the vantage of September 11, 2001 would be at all disappointed. We have not been attacked here in the U.S. and the economy is going strong. So why the knashing of teeth? Because the left has wormed its way into your feelings over the last six years through celebrities, music, movies, t.v. and the unrelenting MSM attacks on Bush. The other thing about conservatives is that we don't like government, even conservative government.  We will never be satisfied with government for long because our philosophy is basically anti-government. Our natural instinct is to oppose government  over the longer term. The only thing we dislike less than Democrats is Republicans, but make no mistake: we really do resent government and we'll always be pissing and moaning about government whether its Democrats or Republicans running it.

Posted by: pendelton at October 13, 2006 03:28 AM (jH3xt)

105 Furthermore, of course, the congressional Republicans actuallly listened to their angry constituents and wounded Bush by refusing to support his plan, voting for a fence-first plan.

...until, of course, they get back into office a few weeks from now. It will then be Amnesty across the board and probably an unfunded fence. Can't wait.

And, of course, this will be done because the Republicans always seem to think that, when they give the Left what they want, the Left will start voting for them. Har...har...har. The Republicans will make the illegals citizens, and the new citizens will vote straight Democrat, simply because capitulation doesn't win converts. I really wish the GOP would learn that.

I also have to call BS on this NOT being a conservative country.

Reagan won 2 landslides as a pure conservative.

Bush 41 won a landslide the first time...and then lost the second because he didn't govern as a conservative.

Clinton NEVER got 50 percent of the vote, and even to get what he did he had to come off as a "centrist."

In '94 we saw a conversion of Congress because they ran on a conservative platform.

And, Congress is not in trouble because they've been behaving too conservatively, now, are they? They're in trouble because they are acting like the plurality they're not.

I would agree that the majority of people in this country is a pack of shallow, vapid reality TV show fanatics who couldn't even list the 3 branches of government. But they're not the majority of voters. That majority consists of the people who usually pay attention to politics, and having more political knowledge --provided it's accurate -- logically creates conservative tendencies in the average non-power-hungry person. The DUmmies that fall in this category would be the exception that proves the rule.

So, all in all, no, I'm not going to buy into this notion that the Republicans can't give their base more of what they deserve due to some plural theory, because I see no evidence that the theory is valid.

Posted by: bbeck at October 13, 2006 04:55 AM (qF8q3)

106 http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/adult.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/amateur.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/anal.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/asian.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/ass.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/babes.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/bdsm.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/bigcock.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/bikini.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/blonde.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/blowjob.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/boobs.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/celebrity.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/cheerleader.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/closeup.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/creampie.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/dildo.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/ebony.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/fat.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/femdom.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/fisting.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/gay.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/gloryhole.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/hairy.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/handjob.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/hardcore.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/hentai.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/interracial.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/latina.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/lesbian.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/lingerie.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/mature.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/movies.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/naked.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/nudism.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/panties.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/pissing.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/porn.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/pornstars.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/pregnant.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/pussy.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/redhead.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/sex.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/shaved.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/shemale.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/slut.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/squirt.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/teen.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/topless.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/upskirt.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/virgin.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/voyeur.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/webcam.html http://cordova.asap.um.maine.edu/~dawesa/viewpointTesting/wife.html

Posted by: mass at February 04, 2007 08:18 PM (uaYm7)

107 Hello! It is informative nice site!

viagra purchase
cheapest phentermine

Thanks!

Posted by: Acheron at February 22, 2007 02:32 PM (8Z6tM)

108 Hello! It is informative interesting site!

carisoprodol cheapest
http://carisoprodol.btewu.info/buy-carisoprodol.html
carisoprodol discount
http://carisoprodolbuy.btewu.info/carisoprodol-online.html

Thanks!

Posted by: Unknown at February 27, 2007 11:05 PM (yyGAV)

109 replica handbags http://tlurl.com/?ZyJwsNAf replica handbags

Posted by: replica handbags at March 03, 2007 08:58 AM (Gq6ku)

Posted by: Unknown at March 20, 2007 04:46 AM (gfWcN)

111 i like you diz celebrex cialis cialis soft tabs herbal phentermine levitra lipitor meridia phentermine prozac soma testosterone ultram viagra viagra soft tabs zocor zoloft http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/celebrex.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/cialis.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/cialis-soft-tabs.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/herbal-phentermine.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/levitra.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/lipitor.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/meridia.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/phentermine.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/prozac.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/soma.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/testosterone.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/ultram.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/viagra.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/viagra-soft-tabs.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/zocor.htm http://www.siteowners.gr/ms/meds/zoloft.htm

Posted by: Cherchel at March 29, 2007 07:24 AM (OX92x)

112 pkizfr xphl hwxytc pkus awhkmu btuemz dolr

Posted by: tngmh irdqfczw at May 22, 2007 11:25 AM (poXr5)

Posted by: Mlm Lead Generation at June 20, 2007 09:55 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Mlm Guru at June 20, 2007 10:04 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Mlm System at June 20, 2007 10:12 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Mlm Realty at June 20, 2007 10:20 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Mlb Hot Lead at June 20, 2007 10:27 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Mlm Compensation Plans at June 20, 2007 10:34 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Mlm Watchdog at June 20, 2007 10:41 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Mlm Failure at June 20, 2007 10:49 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Mlm Haram at June 20, 2007 10:57 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Ford Focus Performance at June 20, 2007 11:03 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Die Cast Model Chrysler 300 Srt8 at June 20, 2007 11:10 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Ford F150 Pickup at June 20, 2007 11:17 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Used 4x4 Ford Trucks For Sale at June 20, 2007 11:24 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: Chevrolet Silverado 1998 Radio Salvage Parts at June 20, 2007 11:32 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: 1985 Chevrolet Trucks at June 20, 2007 11:39 AM (MQ8h0)

Posted by: 2006 Ford Fusion For Sale at June 20, 2007 11:55 AM (i7CuU)

Posted by: Chevrolet Antique Trucks at June 20, 2007 12:03 PM (i7CuU)

Posted by: 2001 Chrysler 300 Recalls at June 20, 2007 12:11 PM (i7CuU)

Posted by: Ford Explorer Service Manual at June 20, 2007 12:19 PM (i7CuU)

Posted by: Used Pickup Trucks For Sale Including Ford Toyota Chevy D at June 20, 2007 12:28 PM (i7CuU)

Posted by: 2000 Gmc Yukon Denali at June 20, 2007 12:36 PM (i7CuU)

Posted by: 1999 Chevrolet Corvette Video Review at June 20, 2007 12:45 PM (i7CuU)

Posted by: Carbon Fiber Hoods Ford Fusion at June 20, 2007 12:53 PM (i7CuU)

Posted by: Ford Explorer Check Engine Light Flashing at June 20, 2007 01:01 PM (i7CuU)

Posted by: 1979 Ford Trucks at June 20, 2007 03:32 PM (NldOW)

Posted by: Custom Rims For Chevrolet Camaro at June 20, 2007 03:41 PM (NldOW)

Posted by: Center Consoles For Chevrolet Pickup Trucks at June 20, 2007 03:58 PM (NldOW)

Posted by: Jeep Logo at June 22, 2007 07:08 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: 1967 Mercury Cougar at June 22, 2007 07:23 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Cadillac Cts at June 22, 2007 07:38 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Cadillac Cts 3.2 Performance at June 22, 2007 07:53 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Leno Buick Video at June 22, 2007 08:08 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: 4 Door Jeep Wrangler at June 22, 2007 08:23 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Nissan Pathfinder Accessories at June 22, 2007 08:38 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Nissan Repair Manual at June 23, 2007 03:06 AM (hIEat)

Posted by: 2000 Nissan Altima at June 23, 2007 03:22 AM (hIEat)

Posted by: Cadillac Escalade Grill at June 23, 2007 02:18 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Audi Scheduled Maintenance 2005 A4 at June 23, 2007 02:45 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Bmw Forums at June 23, 2007 03:00 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Acura Music Link For 2007 Mdx at June 23, 2007 03:13 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: 1998 Dodge Durango Electrical Schematics at June 23, 2007 03:28 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Bmw Financial Services at June 23, 2007 03:41 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Nissan Australia at June 23, 2007 03:54 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Mcallen Nissan Dealership at June 23, 2007 04:08 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: Check Engine Light Audi A6 at June 23, 2007 04:24 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: 1998 Audi Lower Grille Part A6 at June 23, 2007 04:40 PM (hIEat)

Posted by: 2007 Infiniti G35 Sport at June 23, 2007 05:14 PM (W3urv)

Posted by: Extended Infiniti Warranty at June 23, 2007 05:27 PM (W3urv)

Posted by: Import Cars Nissan Skyline at June 23, 2007 05:41 PM (W3urv)

Posted by: 1990 Jeep Wrangler at June 23, 2007 05:55 PM (W3urv)

Posted by: Customvue Laser Vision Correction at June 26, 2007 09:23 AM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Correction Vision Laser Center at June 26, 2007 09:40 AM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Rochester Lasik Laser Eye Surgery Vision Correction at June 26, 2007 09:58 AM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Los Angeles Laser Eye Correction Surgery at June 26, 2007 10:15 AM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: New York Eye Doctor at June 26, 2007 10:32 AM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Beverly Hills Eye Surgery at June 26, 2007 11:06 AM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Eye Exercises For Natural Vision Correction at June 26, 2007 11:30 AM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Denver Laser Vision Correction at June 26, 2007 11:49 AM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Boston Laser Eye Correction Surgery at June 26, 2007 12:09 PM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Los Angeles Laser Eye Correction Surgery at June 26, 2007 12:29 PM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Laser Eye Surgery Chicago at June 26, 2007 12:49 PM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Eye Doctor Rochester at June 26, 2007 01:07 PM (5Ll5i)

Posted by: Vision Correction Surgery Chicago at June 26, 2007 01:27 PM (ltXry)

Posted by: Orange County Laser Vision Correction at June 26, 2007 01:47 PM (ltXry)

Posted by: Vision Correction Laser Lassick Eye Surgery at June 26, 2007 02:08 PM (ltXry)

Posted by: Laser Vision Correction Surgery Mandeville at June 26, 2007 02:27 PM (ltXry)

Posted by: Boulder Lasik Surgeon at June 26, 2007 03:05 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Laser Eye Correction Surgery Los Angeles at June 26, 2007 03:25 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Vision Correction Los Angeles at June 26, 2007 03:54 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Laser Eye Correction Surgery Mcallen at June 26, 2007 04:27 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Laser Eye Vision Correction Treatment at June 26, 2007 04:46 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Ft Worth Laser Eye Doctor at June 26, 2007 05:06 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Lasik Laser Eye Surgery Los Angeles at June 26, 2007 05:26 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Lasik Eye Correction at June 26, 2007 05:45 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Eye Exercise For Natural Vision Correction at June 26, 2007 06:05 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Laser Eye Surgery San Diego at June 26, 2007 06:24 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Laser Eye Surgery Vision Correction Myopic at June 26, 2007 06:44 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Vision Correction Bladeless Laser Eye Surgery at June 26, 2007 07:03 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Boston Laser Vision Surgery at June 26, 2007 07:22 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Laser Eye Surgery Oklahoma City at June 26, 2007 07:41 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Norman Eye Doctor at June 26, 2007 08:01 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Laser Eye Surgery Vision Correction Myopic at June 26, 2007 08:20 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Laser Eye Surgery Calgary at June 26, 2007 08:39 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Myrtle Beach Eye Doctor at June 26, 2007 09:01 PM (bEgza)

Posted by: Imitrex And Lasik at June 27, 2007 02:38 AM (bEgza)

Posted by: Refurbished Espresso Machines at June 27, 2007 06:08 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Picture Of Coffee Cup at June 27, 2007 06:25 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: The Coffee Bean And Tea Leaf at June 27, 2007 06:43 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Drip Coffee Makers at June 27, 2007 07:01 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: French Vanilla Fat Free Coffee Mate Powder at June 27, 2007 07:19 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Coffee Grinders Home Burr at June 27, 2007 07:37 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Printed Coffee Cups at June 27, 2007 07:55 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Coffee House at June 27, 2007 08:14 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Starbucks Coffee at June 27, 2007 08:32 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Expresso Coffee Makers at June 27, 2007 08:51 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Glass Top Coffee Table at June 27, 2007 09:09 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Humorous Coffee Mugs at June 27, 2007 09:27 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Stainless Steel Coffee Mugs at June 27, 2007 09:46 PM (BYKZd)

Posted by: Tomb Raider 5 at June 28, 2007 02:24 PM (++FYW)

Posted by: Lost Planet Walkthrough at June 29, 2007 06:17 AM (24zEm)

Posted by: Bank Foreclosures In Ontario Canada at June 30, 2007 12:58 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Foreclosure Stop Las Vegas Home Mortgage Loan California at June 30, 2007 01:17 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Stop Foreclosure Georgia at June 30, 2007 01:37 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Foreclosure Auctions at June 30, 2007 01:57 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Chase Manhattan Bank Real Estate Ga Foreclosures at June 30, 2007 02:16 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Bank Of America Foreclosure List at June 30, 2007 02:35 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Bank Foreclosure at June 30, 2007 02:55 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Foreclosure Listings Bank at June 30, 2007 03:15 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Florida Foreclosure at June 30, 2007 03:35 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Home Foreclosures at June 30, 2007 03:55 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Need To Stop Foreclosure at June 30, 2007 04:14 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Bank Foreclosure List at June 30, 2007 04:35 PM (TM8lp)

Posted by: Canada Mortgage Broker Foreclosure Bank Banks List at July 01, 2007 06:31 AM (TM8lp)

Posted by: 10640 Affiliate Job Mlm Rid at July 02, 2007 10:35 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Powerline Support Izzy Matos Mlm at July 02, 2007 11:32 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Leads And Network Marketing Leads at July 02, 2007 11:53 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Free Mlm Marketing at July 02, 2007 12:15 PM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Chat Forum Mlm at July 02, 2007 12:40 PM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Real Estate Mlm Nuvu at July 02, 2007 01:03 PM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Online Mlm Business Worldwide at July 02, 2007 01:27 PM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Unlimited Income Opportunity Not Mlm at July 02, 2007 02:27 PM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Business Opportunity Pv at July 02, 2007 05:46 PM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Pronounced at July 02, 2007 06:10 PM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Home Business Guaranteed Income Mlm at July 03, 2007 03:36 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Business Opportunity Rg at July 03, 2007 03:58 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Free Mlm Advice at July 03, 2007 04:20 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Mail Lists at July 03, 2007 04:43 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Training Personal Coaching at July 03, 2007 05:06 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Malay Mlm at July 03, 2007 05:28 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Dream Merchant Mlm at July 03, 2007 05:51 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Premium Mlm Success In Network Marketing at July 03, 2007 06:13 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Company Atlanta at July 03, 2007 06:37 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Squidoo Tags Mlm Home Based Business at July 03, 2007 07:06 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Todd Sharinn at July 03, 2007 07:29 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Monitors at July 03, 2007 07:52 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Network Marketing Success Secrets at July 03, 2007 08:15 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Forum Internet Marketing Mlm Signups at July 03, 2007 08:38 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Leads Prospects at July 03, 2007 09:01 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Internet Connection Faster Mlm at July 03, 2007 09:23 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Marketing Executive Network Group Mlm Lead at July 03, 2007 11:45 AM (dfo5b)

Posted by: Mlm Network Marketing Training at July 03, 2007 01:01 PM (dfo5b)