City of Roses
Noah, you are going to claim that is the thinking of all, or even a majority, of traditional conservatives just because one organization came up with it? Please....
I never suggested that. Had I made the sweeping generalization fallacy in claiming that ALL traditional conservatives shared the same uniform view of the American Freedom Agenda, I would have placed the word "all", "most" or "majority" in front of the words "traditional conservatives and libertarians".
The point is, while you've went off spinning all the issues listed in that conservative group's pledge solely as "personal and biased attacks, orchestrated by the Democrat congressional elite." that's "aimed at bringing down the rooster Bush and having nothing to do with the good of the country.", the fact is there are a considerable number of traditional conservatives and libertarians who are just as outraged over all of this as these usual suspects you frequently point to are, which include Richard Viguerie, considered the "founding father" of all modern conservative strategy, David Keene, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, and Bruce Fein, former Associate Deputy Attorney General during the Reagan Era, certainly among plenty of others beyond this group.
You can choose to dismiss what Ron said yesterday as "right out of the Democrat playbook", but with all due respect, I feel so much of what you've been saying are regurgitated GOP apologist talking points taken from their playbook. Even when the GOP held the trifecta for six years and the Democrats were in the minority in every fashion, apparently it wasn't enough for you to continue focusing almost 100% of your energy upon them, while your cognitive dissidence greeted everything the other party did with a halo effect.
I say this with good intentions, as I believe you to be a good friend and a warm and compassionate person as I have seen from all your wonderful poems and anecdotes that have truly inspired me, and certainly we all hold our own beliefs and ideologies that thus inspire biases in each of us. But I do also believe you have a tendency to act like a GOP apologist, where whenever anyone even merely questions the decision-making of the president or the GOP leadership, you instantly conjure up a defensive reaction and retreat into your 1992-1999 carapace. I certainly admire that you stand by your beliefs and don't leave the past behind, but I also question how you hold certain grudges, make sweeping generalizations out of them and allow yourself to see this duopoly landscape entirely in black and white, rather than in lighter and darker shades of grays.
As you know all too well, I'm not satisfied with this administration, and also am one dissatisfied with this administration who also strongly opposes any organized impeachment effort on Bush and if I were alive during the Lyndon B. Johnson, I'd be speaking up just as loudly over his terrible leadership bogging us down in the Vietnam War, or under Franklin D. Roosevelt when he insisted that Executive Order 9066 was necessary to save American lives and ultimately imprisoned 110,000 Americans under his watch, or under Woodrow Wilson when he insisted that the Espionage Act was necessary to save American lives, which ultimately prosecuted 2,000 Americans as "Hyphenated Americans", who were charged simply for advocating for peace as war went on, all of whom were Democratic presidents.
Although I lean Democratic overall on most issues (I am more alligned with the Republicans on immigration, prayer in public schools and the absolute right of gun ownership), I am an Independent because I have seen how both parties have made a mockery of our democratic institutions over these many years; turning the House of Representatives, first founded to represent the public in contrast to the Senate representing elite interests, into a two-year hybrid of the Senate, as well as kowtowing with special interest groups from MoveOn and organized labor on the left to Focus on the Family and big oil on the right, having individuals represent just those interests on both sides, from Howard Dean and Al Sharpton on the left to name a couple to James Inhofe and Pat Robertson on the right to name a couple, and, finally, getting swamped in political correctness.
I think it's obscene from both ends, and though it may seem I'm particularly outspoken towards this administration, it is because I believe it is just that soiled with cronyism and ideals that are barely conservative at all, and riddled by neoconservatism. I believe it's just that bad. Even so, especially if Hillary Clinton is elected in 2008, having known her history of unethical tricks and deeds, you're going to see me openly criticize this Democratic president quite often I'm sure, or any president who engages in these same sorts of frauds, intimidations, cronyism or executive power grabs in particular.
I believe you absolutely mean well, my friend, but only wish you could stop scurrying to that carapace of cognitive dissidence and consider these sorts of questions and issues beyond party lines.
"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"