why there are no conservatives on Oprano? (Thanks God!)

[Mike AI]

HAHAHA By traditional definitions it is Bush who is Progressive. Conservative means protecting status quo. Bush's dad and Clinton were conservative. W is progressive, he is trying to make major changes internationally, militarily, economicly.

You might not like what he is doing or attempting to do, but Bush is not statist. It is one reason I support him.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

HAHAHA By traditional definitions it is Bush who is Progressive. Conservative means protecting status quo. Bush's dad and Clinton were conservative. W is progressive, he is trying to make major changes internationally, militarily, economicly.

You might not like what he is doing or attempting to do, but Bush is not statist. It is one reason I support him.

Long love the Progressives!

By your definition W is in the good company of other Progressives:
Chengiz Khan,
King George,
Napoleon,
Hitler,
Saddam Hussein.

[Mike AI]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

Long love the Progressives!

By your definition W is in the good company of other Progressives:
Chengiz Khan,
King George,
Napoleon,
Hitler,
Saddam Hussein.

You remember their names don't you?

[NickPapageorgio]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

You remember their names don't you?

I think it's what they tried to accomplish that strikes me as most impressive. Those guys were visionaries...

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by NickPapageorgio

I think it's what they tried to accomplish that strikes me as most impressive. Those guys were visionaries...

..even if the execution sucked!

[NickPapageorgio]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

..even if the execution sucked!

My late grandfather has pictures he snapped of Mussolini's last "public appearance" while he was overseas up in the attic or stored away in a box somewhere. Gruesome.

People didn't seem to like him much there at the end for some reason.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by NickPapageorgio

My late grandfather has pictures he snapped of Mussolini's last "public appearance" while he was overseas up in the attic or stored away in a box somewhere. Gruesome.

People didn't seem to like him much there at the end for some reason.

They didn't like him because they were Comminists and Liberals!

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

You remember their names don't you?

Sure,
as much as we all remember the name of Herostrat who burned the famous gardens, one of the 7 Architectual World Wonder sites.

We also remember the name of Judas Iscariot.

Name recognition is GOOD in marketing, name recognition in History is a double edged sword

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

HAHAHA By traditional definitions it is Bush who is Progressive. Conservative means protecting status quo. Bush's dad and Clinton were conservative. W is progressive, he is trying to make major changes internationally, militarily, economicly.

You might not like what he is doing or attempting to do, but Bush is not statist. It is one reason I support him.

By that definition, Reagan was not a conservative either.

[Mike AI]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

By that definition, Reagan was not a conservative either.

Exactly. Reagan was a progressive. He made major policy changes that we are still benefiting from now. I remember people treating Reagan the same way they are treating Bush - including Europeans. Funny to watch same people grovel at his casket!

If somehow we could combine Bush and Reagan together we would have the perfect leader!

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

Exactly. Reagan was a progressive. He made major policy changes that we are still benefiting from now. I remember people treating Reagan the same way they are treating Bush - including Europeans. Funny to watch same people grovel at his casket!

If somehow we could combine Bush and Reagan together we would have the perfect leader!

My guess is Ronnie would smack G.W. on the back of the head if he were alive and given the opportunity.

Both were catalysts for change, but G.W. spends our tax money like a new england democrat. The answer to everything for him is more government.

Reagan progressive? Yeah, he pushed a lot of change thru as well, but he tried to push the country back to it's root. He reduced the size of the federal government and pushed power back to the states. He believed in trusting the people to spend the money they earned instead of allocating larger and larger chunks of it to the government to spread around to those too lazy or stupid to work and live within their means.

And foreign policy? G.W. pussy foots. This is where Reagain did use the federal government and tax money....he spent so much on building up our strength that the soviets went broke just trying to keep up.

[PornoDoggy]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

My guess is Ronnie would smack G.W. on the back of the head if he were alive and given the opportunity.

Both were catalysts for change, but G.W. spends our tax money like a new england democrat. The answer to everything for him is more government.

Reagan progressive? Yeah, he pushed a lot of change thru as well, but he tried to push the country back to it's root. He reduced the size of the federal government and pushed power back to the states. He believed in trusting the people to spend the money they earned instead of allocating larger and larger chunks of it to the government to spread around to those too lazy or stupid to work and live within their means.

And foreign policy? G.W. pussy foots. This is where Reagain did use the federal government and tax money....he spent so much on building up our strength that the soviets went broke just trying to keep up.

Reagan was just as good at don't tax but spend anyway as GW is.

Reagan talked the talk.

What Ronald Reagan proved is that even a 2nd-rate actor who co-starred with a monkey could play the role of President of the United States.

He did spend the Soviet Union into submission, but probably only accelerated the inevitable by 5-10 years. Your children will be paying for that - theirs will start to pay for GW's expenditures.

Aside from that, what did he do in foreign policy? He threw a temper tantrum at Ghadafi - a plan so lame that the French refused us use of their air space because they did not want to participate in what was obviously only a publicity stunt.

He also sent peacekeepers into Leabanon, and we all know how well that worked out.

IMHO, an objective history of his Presidency written 25-30 years hence will show him to be an average president.

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by PornoDoggy

Reagan was just as good at don't tax but spend anyway as GW is.

Reagan talked the talk.

What Ronald Reagan proved is that even a 2nd-rate actor who co-starred with a monkey could play the role of President of the United States.

He did spend the Soviet Union into submission, but probably only accelerated the inevitable by 5-10 years. Your children will be paying for that - theirs will start to pay for GW's expenditures.

Aside from that, what did he do in foreign policy? He threw a temper tantrum at Ghadafi - a plan so lame that the French refused us use of their air space because they did not want to participate in what was obviously only a publicity stunt.

He also sent peacekeepers into Leabanon, and we all know how well that worked out.

IMHO, an objective history of his Presidency written 25-30 years hence will show him to be an average president.

I'll always be a fan for how he handled the air traffic controller strike.