Friday, Mark spoke with our good friend, Don in Lake Ronkonkoma!
Don compared today’s Iran Hostage Crisis with the one in 1979.
Don in Lake Ronkonkoma on the Iran Hostage Crisis
[Mark Levin Fan is proudly powered by WordPress.]
Friday, Mark spoke with our good friend, Don in Lake Ronkonkoma!
Don compared today’s Iran Hostage Crisis with the one in 1979.
[Mark Levin Fan is proudly powered by WordPress.]
ANybody home? 
.jpg)
Ahmadinejad cancelled his visit to the U.N. just before the crewmen were taken hostage! He is consolidating his power internally because he knows that we have him surrounded physically and overwhelmed militarily. But he knows that half of this nation’s government is comprised of a dying political party that will undermine the nation itself if that will lead them back to the power without which their lives are meaningless. And Ahmadinejad thus is weakening US internally (with success- thanks to the Drive-By media). This is no time to go wobbly! We must attack Iran before that madman gets nuclear weapons!
My thoughts EXACTLY Dub!! I’m thinking if this is how AABADDABBA is acting today without nukes…what can we expect when he truly has nukes?? SCARRY!!
I’m with you Demofan! I was just curious, did anybody come up with an adequate definition of “Moderate Republican” that was satisfying to you? MLF said in a recent posting that there really was not much middle ground. And I agree.
I have often thought that W is a “moderate Republican”. He is more compassionate than conservative. He is excessively slow to anger with constituencies among the people who literally wish that he were dead. He wishes not to lead a conservative movement among the people, but rather to “moderate” the ENTIRE body politic (half of whom are consumed with seething rage and hatred for him!) President Bush is trying to be the President of ALL the people, and he alienates his Conservative base (or should we say, MODERATES in way that they don’t love him nearly as well as the Libs hate him.) W is a “Moderate Republican”. How about THAT for a definition of “Moderate Republican?”
What the world doesn’t ever understand, to the delight of the left in this Country, is that true conservatism is compassionate. It is the “libs†that have created the welfare state and cycle of dependency under the guise of compassion. What is compassionate about generation after generation of fatherless children dependent on failed government strategy supposedly designed to mitigate the very issues that it creates? Quite frankly it is child abuse. The socialists are like bad parents. They create children but never raise them. Perfect solution is Hillary’s indoctrination village strategy (it takes a village). That is code for even bigger government. What agency will run that? Do Republicans ever ask the “libs†where they get the guts to ask for more government and money based upon a failed track record that spans decades? They certainly have no problem pulling the financial rug out from G. Bush for his Iraq policy, even in the face of success.
I have previously stated that G. Bush has to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear capabilities at all cost even if he is impeached for doing so. Iran gets nukes and Israel dies. It is that simple. Anyone dare to guess what goofball fraction in Iran will not be responsible for unleashing a nuclear strike?
Anyone also notice that Putin is moaning about an eastern European missile defense shield designed to protect against an Iranian ballistic attack when he himself is giving the Iranians the means to do so? He is a KGB punk that never got over our unwillingness to understand his Chechnian problem.
WOW!! DUB!! You’ve got me corned on that one!! I am barely catching up on the definition of Republican vs Social vs Economic vs National Security Conservative.
Talk about CORNfusing!! IMO Bush/Thompson are RIGHT on the war…but WRONG on immigration. Tancredo is RIGHT on immigration but WRONG on the war.
I’m gonna stay “neutral” and continue getting educated by TGO.
Regarding W…I just had this conversation with my boyfriend about him being compassionate/loyal to his appointees. He seems like he’d be a good friend to have. But if I were Laura W…I’d have some serious pillow talk with him about his enemies!! But then again…that’s just me.
I don’t know any more about his being so loyal to his appointees. W has handed the Left the scalps of Rumsfeld, Lott, DeLay, Libby and God knows who else? W is loyal to a fault to the Left on account of their being Americans, and they are treasonous to America herself out of their personal hatred of W. The Left will not be happy until W is dead- the sooner the better! And W tries to appease these monsters by throwing over some of his most loyal team members!
And is W being truly loyal to his judicial appointees? Just a couple more years, and the Left will have filibustered him out of his ability to EVER get them confirmed! What about his loyalty to the Conservatives who are his base? WHEN do WE get some “RED MEAT?!”
Isn’t it a shame that Gonzales never wanted to know the name of the leaker in the Libby case so that he could be fair with the investigation. Had he known and understood it was Armitage he could of aggressively called a halt to what became a 2-year, very expensive taxpayer funded fishing expedition that cost the Administration a loyal and effective supporter while ultimately giving the unscrupulous MSM more fuel for propaganda. The sad irony is that by not getting involved before this nonsense metastasized he created the next victim to possibly be sacrificed… himself! What a shame. On that note I am taking 2 aspirins and will say “Goodnightâ€ÂÂ.
OK DUB..let me rephrase the “loyalty to his appointees” phrase. I guess what I was referring specifically to was that he chose personal friends of his such as Michael Brown to be head of FEMA, Johnny Sutton…etc..
The “loyalty” part is when he told him during a press conference after Katrina “Good job Brownie”…and then the rest is “history”…or when he didn’t give up Rumsfeld until after the Nov elections which many say was a contributing factor to having lost last year’s elections.
I dunno..I’m gonna take Task’s advice and take 2 aspirins and call it a night too!!.
W has got to be less loyal to the half of the populace that wants him eliminated in every way possible, and more loyal to the Conservative base to whom he OWES his loyalty! The good news is that W IS capable of extending and commanding from others a strong bond of loyalty. He should stop loving his enemies so much. He should let God’s own grace be sufficient for his enemies.
George Bush might do well to announce to the Congress and the American public that for the good of our military he is being forced by the liberal majority in Congress to start removing our troops immediately since they have guaranteed our failure and the success of the enemy by the time table incorporated in their legislation. Why wait a year or even a month when failure is certain the day we leave? Under these guaranteed results, unless a new bill without a timetable for withdrawal is immediately provided he must retreat. The earlier the better in the interest of saving lives and money. Blame that on the “libs’ loudly and clearly.
BTW, anyone notice that the disguised pork in this bill provided by the “socialist appeasers†as necessary emergency spending subsidizes their constituents and what therefore amounts to future votes to them that will be paid for with your tax dollars. It is nothing more than a tax-payer funded campaign strategy.