How sad is it to watch Bush period..especially during a press conferences and speeches..he tears up the english language but wants illegal immigrants to learn it, i would suggest a refresher course himself before he made any demands on anyone else.
2007-06-01 15:05:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by jayana412 2
·
4⤊
0⤋
Bush ??
What was left of the Reagan era was lost in the last days of the Clinton presidency. Don't take this personally, but you need to get more information from other sources. Not just the major news networks.
As for the GOP, it will continue to adapt under changing political situations just as the Democrats. Political strategy is far different now than it was then. Each President has his different idiosyncrasies. Not Bush's fault that the media hates him with a passion, as they did Reagan. Reagan's bulletproof speaking ability made it difficult for them to pick apart every word and take things out of context. The people saw what they saw and heard what they heard when he spoke. Now, networks choose not to cover a speech. Then, the next morning, give their own version. Fine Monday morning quarterbacking. Easily clipped and edited for television. Tough people to fight when they know they control the message.
I would have to say it is not Bush who has created this illusion of the GOP in your eyes. But he has helped by being a target. If you tell people a lie long enough, they will begin to believe it.
2007-06-01 15:22:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Robert S 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
The 'Party' has been going down hill since Lincoln's assassination. Saying Reagan worked so hard to create the GOP, only gives credibility to his phoniness and the GOP's lack of repsonsiblity!
To StephanS.... The Democrats under genuine leadership of the four time President F. D. Roosevelt won World War Two.
2007-06-01 15:17:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by razor 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
What is "Sad" is watching our Constitution's guarantees being distorted and corrupted.
Our Fonding Fathers wanted the people to know what was going on in all directions and by all people.
I'm sure they did not intend for a rich combine to buy a newspaper or TV station then use it to distort news in order to advance the position or goal of a political party or some weirdo who wants to be President.
It is in this area that our country is weak and it is from this area that our enemies will make their advances against us.
Lies and distortions that are hidden behind " freedom of the press" will destroy us if the other holders of Press cards do not jump up and publicly object.
A TV or Newspaper presentation that is purposely distorted, even as an innuendo, is not news, it's propaganda and should be treated as slanted trash.
What are you watching ( or reading ) today that is insulting your intelligence and is meant to brain-wash you?
Ask yourself
2007-06-09 08:00:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mr. Been there 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
When Reagan had a problem with Libyan President Muammar Kaddafi's support of terrorism, he authorized the bombing of his palaces, announced after the fact to the public. A surprise attack which killed several family members and shut Kaddafi's mouth.
When GWB has a problem with Bin Laden, he announces his intention to destroy Afghanistan 3 weeks in advance so Bin Laden can escape. When the military Industrial Complex whines that it isn't raping the US Treasury enough in the Afghan War, GWB invents a war in Iraq, giving Saddam plenty of advance notice to go hide underground for a year while we destroy the country and raid the treasury yet again.
Reagan had a variety of advisors and would go along with the best advice, or ignore them and go his own way, which was usually when he was at his best. He wasn't owned by the neocon think tanks and Military industrial complex investors. He could have destroyed Libya then raided the Treasury to 'rebuild' it, but that would be treason.
This is just one of many differences between them, but GWB's love of that treasury money lies at the heart of much of it.
Reagan must be turning in his grave.
2007-06-01 15:23:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Reagan's NWO Agenda was the "beginning of the end" for America!
A New Order of the Ages
Novus Ordo Seclorum
New World Order
Globalization
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/newworldindex.htm
THE NEW CONSERVATISM AND A NEW WORLD ORDER
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/histryotln/order.htm
2007-06-08 07:12:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oh, please. What is so great about the GOP? Bush's arrogant actions are creating the infighting. In actuality, political parties are nothing but a tool to divide the people. There is not a dime's worth of difference between democrats and republicans. They are both controlled by the global elitists, whose only interest is more power and more money for themselves, at the expense of the common people.
2007-06-08 01:51:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by nolajazzyguide 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Almost as sad that this country has willfully created an agency that is a direct contradiction of the Charter that we signed with 49 other countries in 1945.
The Central Intelligence Agency (aka CIA).
Ron Paul - keep him alive for the 2008 election. If there is one that is.
2007-06-07 14:43:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's about the same as watching Clinton dismantle the Democrat party back in the 1990's.
It will probaly take about another 4 years for the republicans to regain control of the Senate.
The Republicans may never regain the House, but looking at this Congress , so far, it might not be as far in the future as many believed it would be.
As to Presidential Elections, I don't really think Bush has any bearing on who the next President is gonna be.
2007-06-01 16:13:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by jeeper_peeper321 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
NAH!!
Nixon dismantled the GOP - Reagan chopped it into kindling and Bush is burning it.
2007-06-01 15:19:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋