RE: roland (5:15 p.m.)Republicans did not lead the way on civil
rights, but Dwight Eisenhower is credited for taking some steps that would be
criticized by Republicans today.Also, Eisenhower was pushed by
members of his administration to step in get involved with Vietnam. American
involvement increased under Kennedy and expanded completely under Johnson.
However, the neoconservatives today would howl if there had been around with
Eisenhower in the post-Korea period.The point here is that
Republicans today would repudiate Dwight Eisenhower and the talking heads of
wingnut radio would call him a socialist and every evil slur they could make up
in their brain-storming strategy sessions.Finally, Barry Goldwater
was unhappy about the Republican Party getting more involved in cultural issues
and drifting away from its conservative roots. It is doubtful that he would
find much to be proud about with current Republican candidates and the issues
they support most. He believed that government must stay out of people's
personal lives and allow them choice.
"Anonymous | 5:24 p.m. July 8, 2008Terror! Terror! Terror!Security! Security! Security!If you dare vote for a Democrat - you are a
traitor and must hate the troops and America, and apple pie, and ... Disneyland
... and ... Boy Scouts and ... everything good.This message was
approved by the National Republican Committee. :>"Not really funny.
Mostly just ignorant. Democrats HATE the troops, and HATE the military. Care to
refute that with facts? Democrats HATE the Boy Scouts, and Democrats
HATE the Constitution. Democrats also HATE Christians and Jesus Christ, but they
ADORE Muslims, and New Agers.I would say, you have much to learn
about politics, and facts.
"LOL | 2:23 p.m. July 8, 2008Mitt was the biggest flip flopper. Why
didn't this bother Utah republicans :-)"Because he is not a flip
flopper.Care to list them, or are you just building yet another
straw man?Times change, and there is little wrong with a man
admitting he was doing something wrong and has changed his mind. You will have a
hard time naming three things that Romney really 'flip flopped' on. All you got,
is the MSM mantra. Facts have nothing to do with the MSM.....
"Do liberals have a brain or not?"I see the Rush Limbaugh Show must
be over for today.And its playtime again for the kiddies.
Terror! Terror! Terror!Security! Security! Security!If you dare vote
for a Democrat - you are a traitor and must hate the troops and America, and
apple pie, and ... Disneyland ... and ... Boy Scouts and ... everything
good.This message was approved by the National Republican Committee.
It helped with chinese, vietnam, etc.HE was the master when it came
to foreign policy.RE: GUSAre saying in was
republicans that lead the way in civil rights?ON point seven: that
happened during the vietnam war under democratic congress and president.Bush/cheney have nothing to do with it.Haliburton basically fired
cheney, and now he wants to help them?Do liberals have a brain or
not?A logical though or not?Botton line is I guess republican
presidents are actually pretty good.
Can those who insist that Barack Obama provide quotes of what the man previously
said regarding a position and what he now says that is the opposite and provide
references to what was said?You can easily make stuff up just to
provide "proof", but documenting the cited statements will help validate your
point. All that I can find is his changes on FISA, but his position on Iraq
remains unchanged.I was particularly dismayed that McCain has
dramatically changed his position on torture. He went from outright
condemnation of the practice (using his own experience to demonstrate how wrong
it is) to now supporting it in the way George W. Bush and Dick Cheney proposed.
And this was not "a single flash of insight on the way to Damascus". It was a
calculated political move to ingratiate himself with the wingnuts of his
party.McCain is no longer a maverick. He is mainstream in the mold
of Bush & Co. Unfortunately, his appeal to independents is rapidly diminishing
as he moves more to the Right and mimics the Bush policies of extending the tax
cuts to the rich and saying that the 90% making less than $250K will benefit!
I salute Eisenhower, the last great moderate Republican, a man who didn't have
to prove that he loved war because he had helped our side in the biggest war of
all. But of course, Eisenhower wasn't the reason Frank O. wrote, was it?It seems silly to blame the Parties for not producing candidates you
like. Who are the Parties? They are us. At one point there were almost 20
presidential candidates from the two major parties, but then they were sidelined
one by one, not because their campaigns were so terrific, but because they
WEREN'T so terrific, yes, including Mitt. You can still vote for
whoever you like, of course. Bo Gritz, Adlai Stevenson, Strom Thurmond, Jesse
Jackson, Wendell Wilke. No one will stop you. Bob Barr (easy to spell), Ralph
Nader (easy to remember), Mr. Rogers (no longer with us), Mr. Roberts
(fictional). The only thing I would warn against is taking advice from Frank O.
I fear he does not have an open mind. Maybe he'll write in next week and tell
Isnt it ironic that Dwight Eisenhower would not be even considered as a viable
candidate in todays Republican Party? After the dramatic changes in the partys
ideology following the ascendancy of Ronald Reagan, the conservative Dwight
Eisenhower would probably be branded a socialist because of the progressive
nature of some of his policies. Certainly, expanding Social Security and
getting the government involved in the integration of Arkansas schools would be
looked upon very negatively by the conservative talk show hosts and Fox News
today.It is evident that the conservatives of old, Eisenhower,
Goldwater, and Robert Taft would only appeal to a small segment of Republicans
today because of their support of basic conservative ideas. However, the growth
of social conservatism leaves no place for these men in the modern Republican
Party. They would have to become Blue Dog Democrats.Modern
Republicans like Reagan, Bush II, and the new John McCain are very different
from these early leaders. Not only did they dramatically change the direction
of the modern conservative movement, the incorporated policies that ran directly
counter to the pre-Reagan political world.
Richard Nixon was as experienced and "qualified" as anyone who has ever been
elected president. It didn't seem to help him much.
Let's put it THIS way.Obama can fill and entire stadium just about any
place he goes to relate to people who understand and appreciate where he's
coming from.At the last fundraiser in Utah (the reddest state in America)
the orginal plans for a large hall (Little America, I believe) went bust and the
best the GOP could muster was a small gathering in somebody's personal
residence. AND THIS WAS IN THE BASTION OF REPUBLICANISM!Bye-bye GOP.
Mitt was the biggest flip flopper. Why didn't this bother Utah republicans :-)
Obama experienced in flip-flopping?Oh boy.I remember when McCain was
much more of a moderate. He didn't tolerate torture. He was a maverick.
Mainstream Republicans didn't care for him because he made his own choices
instead of just following the party line. Now he's lined up pretty nicely with
other Republicans.Obama has a long way to go before he flip-flops nearly
as much as McCain has.
Earl Warren was a republican. Warren would have ever let the court elect Bush.
Bush as been a blessing. Bush has shown Americans the trickle doesn't work. If
you don't pay for a war you pay more for gas with a devalued dollar. There would be no Obama if there hadn't been Bush. When republican
loose this year, it will be those whose blindly voted for Bush and who are
calling Obama a socialism that made Obama president.Thanks Rush and
your minon of fools.
BO is experienced - in flip-flopping. Now that he has secured the demo
nomination, he is switching all his extremely left wing positions and moving
towards the center. Just like any experienced politician. Of course, that
doesn't mean he's an experienced leader.Gus, I'm glad you have
enlightened us on some of the negative things Ike did to us. The ill effects of
the Warren Court are still with us and the expansion of social security means it
will go broke long before it can fulfil all its commitments.I see
there are still a few poor souls who seem to think GWB is running again. Nope,
he's not. So sad that your best reponse to anything negative about your boy BO
is "Oh Yeah? Well Bush...!!!" Apparently you are unaware of any BO positives to
use as a counter-argument, so you fall back on your standard GWB bashing. As
original as Rush Limbaugh's self-absorbed blather.
It's true, Ike's stock has steadily risen through the years as people have
learned more about him. It's too bad folks here in Utah can't remember his
remarks about the "military-industrial complex." I was just a kid when I heard
these remarks on TV but they have left an indelible impression on me. That
prediction has become all too true. So in remembering Ike, remember how
accurately he anticipated our out of control military with its corporate
This election has been brought to you by the Conspiracy section of the
Conservative Republican party.The first goal of the conspiracy is to
not allow the candidates to talk about their actual programs and plans. Direct
the flow of words toward past history, candidates friends (and pastors) and in
general make the candates act like kids on the school playground.The
second goal is to elect the weakest and most unelectable candidate in the
primary. This was accomplished by the early acceptance of John McCain thus
freeing up many so called independant voters (who always vote repuplican) to
vote in the democrat primary.The third goal was to disrupt the
primary by setting democrats in Florida at a disadvantage by setting the Florida
primary date in conflict to the Democrats rules.There are probably
many more parts to the conspiracy, but these are the ones most obvious to me.
No experience in ANYTHING? please, he is in the senate, you don't get there by
knowing nothing. An over exaggeration as bad as the media that you point to.
Frank,We were not cheated by the parties, we were cheated by the
media, who chose McCain and destroyed the rest, and who chose Obama and Hillary,
seeing either one as a win-win.What happened to all the republicans
who were on those debates. There were no Reagans for sure, but McCain never said
anything useful during them. Did they defend Romney's right to run in spite of
his religion? No, the led the attack. Rudy was dumped for doing less than
Clinton did, in the oval office, and the others were simply ignored, and pushed
right off the stage. The media selected McCain. The republic is
dead, and democracy has gone with it. The people no longer choose the
candidates. Media does that for us. YOu cannot find too many R's who think that
McCain was the best choice out of all those who were attempting to be heard, yet
there he is, basically a democrat in R's clothing and he is the choice, because
CNN and ABC wanted him there.Time to wake up and smell the coffee
before its too late, or is it too late already?
I too look at our choices for president and wonder how this happened. Somehow
the system failed.
Let's put it THIS way:If an illiterate richie-rich loser with no
experience like George W. Bush can become president -an intelligent, and
compassionate black guy named Obama should have no problem.Prediction:
Obama by a landslide.
Gosh Frank I am really sorry that your boy the Mittster didn't pass muster with
the majority of Americans due to his chameleon like performance on issues.
"Parties should be ashamed of these nominees"? I think either will do nicely and
as history shows no one can predict the performance of a president from his
prior life. I stand behind the system that produced these two nominees...it's
called democracy. If you feel ashamed, I suggest you run next time!
The choices we have now are better than the choices we had four years ago.
A long time ago we arrived at a point where the best person to be president
would not be electable. The best resume would not get Eisenhower elected in the
era of style we live in today. Still, I'm voting Obama. His demonstrated
eloquence and intelligence will serve him, and us, well. Every time someone
makes statements about Obamas' experience, I can't help but wonder back to what
we thought when we sent dubya to office?
I'm not a big McCain supporter, but how can you say he isn't prepared for the
job? Have you read McCain's biography? Or just the one the media has provided
No one is ever really prepared to be president except for those who are
re-elected to the office. Was Lincoln prepared? No chance. An election loser
whose only experience was lawyering in a semi-frontier state. Was Washington?
Not really. He was a good commander and he ran a plantation, liquor distillery,
land speculation, and other money making operations quite well but does that
mean he was "prepared" for the presidensity (as Pogo called it)? Go through the
list. The only one who was actually prepared for the office was Martin van
Buren who was specifically prepared for the job by Andrew Jackson. And van
Buren screwed it up! The fact is we never know what we're getting
when we elect a president. The 2000/2004 elections conclusively demonstrate
that, don't they? A president establishes his greatness not through specific
brilliance at machinations of foreign policy or getting laws passed or enforcing
them once they are passed but in the kind of spirit and vision with which he
invigorates the nation. McCain's vision seems limited and dominated by the
shortsightedness of a preference for wealth and imperialism. Obama seems aware
of what this nation's future needs will be. Vote for him!
Dwight Eisenhower brought both leadership and command skills to the unruly
American political landscape. He came with an extremely well-qualified resume
which very few presidential candidates possessed. However, to use him as a
reference for judging the current candidates only intensifies the spotlight on
the inexperience of the current president when he ran for president in 2000.There were major accomplishments by the Eisenhower administration that
benefited the American people immensely: 1. He oversaw the the
cease-fire for the Korean War.2. He enlarged the Social Security
program to make life better for many Americans and established the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare.3. He began building the Interstate
Highway System that benefits us to this day.4. He supported civil
rights for all Americans by proposing the Civil Right Acts of 1957, 1960 and
initiated integration of Arkansas schools.5. He nominated Gov. Earl
Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court giving America the benefit of the Warren
Court.6. He opposed McCarthyism in the early 50s.7. He
warned America about the dangers of a military-industrial complex that has come
to fruitition under the current Bush/Cheney presidency.Dwight
Eisenhower was well prepared and did much for America.
Ofrank, can't you see that Senator Obama doesn't need actual experience?He's an inspirational leader whose personal life story, O'rhetorical
gifts and garden variety policies are enough to see the country into an