ever admit they are wrong about anything (& thus losing to the liberals)?
2007-01-20 04:46:17 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
People who support Bush are not conservative, that's why the term "neocon" was coined to portray the scum that has temporarily hijacked the Republican party.
2007-01-20 04:52:41 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Where did you come up with this wonderful idea? Your parents? The mainstream, LIBERAL media? Did you come up with this original thinking on your own? Wow, do you belong to Mensa? I rather hate to point this out, but generalization about a portion of any population is BIGOTRY. Are you an honest to goodness real life BIGOT? Gosh, mister, I ain't never seen one of those before. What does it feel like to be a BIGOT? You actually sound like one of those mind-numbed robots programmed by the mainstream media. Have you ever thought for yourself, or have you always followed the party line? Losing to Liberals? Gee, only when they successfully throw mud instead of put forth what they stand for for public display. Of course Liberals don't really have IDEAS They just feel things. Right?I don't support everything Bush says, or does. Do you give unconditional support to Hilary, Al, Nancy Palosi, or Dingy Harry? If Liberals ran on the issues and stuck to facts they lose all the time. They have to lie, but then again, they have the mainstream media to do it for them. They get away with lying about things no Conservative would. Look at Bill Clinton. Let's not generalize anymore, right? Or, should I continue to consider you a BIGOT?
2007-01-20 05:58:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, a lot of conservatives don't support Bush because he really isn't a true fiscal / social conservative. And a lot do probably out of loyalty, or believe in what he's doing for the country.The fact that you think all conservatives think the same shows that you're probably not as open minded as you like to think you are. Conservatives and liberals both have people in their ranks who can listen to all sides of an issue, and they also have people who 'never admit they are wrong about anything'. Your premise is flawed.
2007-01-20 04:52:58 · answer #3 · answered by MacLeod_73 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
well i dont give bush my unconditional support. I am upset with how he handled the war. Rumsfeild i thought is a good peace time sec of defence but in war you need someone who will probally be willing to never work in ashington again. They never had enough troops in Iraq. They started of way to little. They sould of sent more and more and more. Hire private security teams beged borrowed or buy other nations troops.
I think he still caves in slighty to political pressure. The democrates are not right so they aren't winning either. There plan is to be like the french run away and give the enemy whatever they want. WE MUST WIN IN IRAQ OR WE WILL NEVER WIN ANY WAR OR CONFLICT AGIAN.
2007-01-20 04:56:52 · answer #4 · answered by bigpapatazz 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that was exactly the case before the last elections but you're seeing more conservatives who are standing up for what they really believe and feel is best for this country. I think Bush has lost a LOT of support from both sides honestly.
2007-01-20 04:52:50 · answer #5 · answered by carpediem 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, when your arguments include, usually, sneering at how worthless the other side is for not agreeing with you, then there's a lot invested in being right.
Usually, it does seem like the important thing is not to admit being wrong until there is absolutely, 100%, no way around it.
2007-01-20 05:07:14 · answer #6 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think most conservatives supported him because they saw him as the lesser of two evils. Isn't that what everybody, liberal and conservative alike, does? Vote for the candidate that pisses them off the least? I've voted in every presidential election since I became eligible (1972) and I've never in my life voted FOR anyone, but always AGAINST the other S.O.B. So far, I see no reason to believe the next election will be any different.
2007-01-20 04:55:57 · answer #7 · answered by texasjewboy12 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bush is a tool of the Neo-Conservatives.
It is he is is giving unconditional support to them.
Old school Conservatives are distancing themselves from Bush.
2007-01-20 04:56:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Do Liberals give unconditional support to Nancy Pelosi because of their blind faith, or because they don't want be abandoned by their party like Joe Lieberman was?
2007-01-20 04:53:29 · answer #9 · answered by The Cult of Personality 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's sad really, it's also unfortunate.
Politicians, Bush included, are not Saints, they are not Gods.
And yet, some Conservatives seem to inject some sort of infallibility in their leaders.
This sense of 'leader holiness' and Democracy can never work together.
2007-01-20 04:55:34 · answer #10 · answered by ck4829 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋