Originally Posted by todd93

You've not been paying attention. I have no hatred what so ever for my fellow Americans. I am hurt that Liberals offer terrorists, you know, people that want our immediate and total destruction, aid and comfort. I am hurt that Liberals want us to lose in Iraq, when it is now EXTREMELY winnable. If there is anyone in the country who has hatred for their fellow American, it is your common Liberal. The people that say they can do the impossible by supporting the troops and not supporting the missions. The people that do not understand the dangers we're in if we don't stand up for ourselves, and show the world that we are the lone superpower, and we WILL NOT FALL.

Bush and Cheney are not doing the bidding of the Saudis. Liberals tend to demonize them and would give anything, even our Constitutional rights, in order to destroy the President. Sure, I don't agree with many things he's done, but he's a good man, and a respectable man, he's honest, and our security is in his interest, unlike anybody (including Bush 41) since Ronald Reagan. And again, I agree with you, we do need a real leader, a Fred Thompson, or Newt Gingrich who will unite us and lead us with the only thing that has ever made this country work, good Conservative leadership. Conservatism works every time it's tried. Liberalism is in fact another word for Socialism, Liberals are hell bent on robbing us of our rights. They lie, mislead, misquote, and mis characterize just to get people to vote for them. True, Republicans have their share of people like that, but it's the Liberal Republicans like Lincoln Chaffee, John McCain, and Chuck Hagel. We need Conservative leadership, people who will give the power to whom it belongs . . . US, you and I, all of us.

Originally Posted by MattLarson

Spin spin spin. All three cast the entire Republican party - including every voter - as part of the huge problem with "their" country.

If you don't see that as calling Republicans "the enemy", I submit it is because you don't want to.

You know darn well how I feel about a lot of the policies of this administration. Claiming I don't "see the damage" is nonsense, and I suspect you know it.

Matt

Originally Posted by Jason Marcel

It was the conservative idea of going above the law to illegally wiretap on American citizens. This law, from people who believe in "smaller, less intrusive government", and you try to say that Liberals are the enemy? Conservatism in America has been thrown on it's head these last 5 years, and by whom? Conservatives say they don't like gays, but they're all a bunch of male-hooker-renting fags. They say they have a war on drugs, but when fatty Rush gets busted it's a "health issue", but a "crime issue" when it's a black guy. You say you're for smaller less intrusive government, but what do you call the waste of bureaucracy that it the Homeland Security Dep't?

Conservatives have absolutely no credibility. You don't even stand for the things you're supposed to stand for. Go away and take some conservatism 101 classes that'll remind you why nation-building is a folly, why doubling the deficit isn't conservative, why denying global warming and the theory of evolution make you appear unevolved yourselves.

That's all.

Originally Posted by Jason Marcel

When will Gonzo resign? To quote Bush, "Maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow....but maybe tomorrow".

Originally Posted by goober

Actually Matt, I don't think you republicans are the enemy, I think you're morons, partly based on your posts.

Originally Posted by goober

During his confirmation hearings Gonzales said "I would never, ever, ever , ever ever, ever, ever fire a US Attorney for political reasons"

At the same time there are emails discussing "firing the 20% of US Attorneys that aren't loyal Bushies".

Originally Posted by Steve

A "problem"?

No, they were a "problem" 30 years ago. Now, they serve as a conduit for anyone who wants to illegally enter our country to do us harm or bleed our social systems, and Bush has only decided on a strategy of appeasement.

He's a failure because he's not addressed the most basic aspect of national security: secure borders...

Originally Posted by todd93

I agree that he's in bed with the Liberals on this, they all want open borders, but if Algore had won in 2000 we'd all either be dead, or enslaved by terrorists by now.

Originally Posted by Steve

Limbaugh's a fuckin' buffoon.

The only bigger buffoons are the people who swallow everything he says...

Originally Posted by Birdzeye

Perhaps it's time you started backing up such ugly allegations with some reliable evidence. What a disgusting remark to make about other citizens.

Originally Posted by Birdzeye

I really don't think it matters whether Gonzalez stays or goes. If he stays, he will be an albatross around Bush's neck, which suits me fine. If he goes, Bush will just appoint another sleazebag.

Originally Posted by TheStripey1

whereas that may be true, it will have to be a sleezebag that is approved by congress...

Originally Posted by Curly

Ah, nuts. I was sure Gonzales would be gone by now.

Maybe today. Or, tomorrow is Friday, the "throw out the trash" day for recent administrations. Hmmmmm.

Originally Posted by Steve

"If"... "if"...

The fact is that Gore didn't win; Bush did, and he's done absolutely nothing to secure our borders.

Justifying the state of our borders by saying how bad it could've been is no justification at all. It's nothing more than a pitifully weak argument, based on nothing other than blatant partisanship, to avoid the fact that Bush is a dismal, abject failure in addressing even the most basic aspects of our national security; that being border security...