Sarah Palin, The White Queen

Great blog as usual. And I think you are right about the our chances in '08 now.

I wanted to let you know that I am blogging at Red State. So far my blogs are doing quite well, although there was a weird incident today when they took down my blog, "What about Newt?" thinking that I was someone that had been causing problems, coming back and masquerading as me. It was pretty funny.

Come by and say hello. I am very happy! When you sign up to comment, you also get a place to blog if you want it. Some use it and others don't.

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/sandra_lea_wise

with the professionalism of Red State -- and honored...other than your sister, there doesn't seem to be anyone from the old gang...

And I'd love to get in on it unfortunately, they haven't sent my password. I tried re-register but they said "Sanity 102" was taken, so I guess they just haven't processed my application yet.

I doubt I'll blog there as I have so little time as it is--and since my main purpose for blogging is have a place to rant and the absolutes know better than to darken my doors...I think I'll keep this blog going for a bit. Besides, I love Steve's blog...the people who post there are kindred spirits...and it's fun.

By the way...I'm getting into it with Peppermint on your sister's blog. She addressed me. I keep telling her the GOP will take THEIR marbles and go home but she seems shocked at the very idea of the GOP no longer trying to please the absolutes who don't believe what the GOP says anyway. Tell Sheila, I am sorry...I am trying not to let what happened at your blog happens at hers.

Sanity, on your "white queen" blog: it's wonderful. I don't think there are ANY conservative writers -- on Townhall or anywhere else -- doing work anywhere near the quality of what you're putting out. Who knows? Maybe we'll all become rich and famous in the future? (And perhaps hundred-dollar-bills will rain down from the heavens!)

Does the fact that Sarah's beautiful (and played basketball like your truly?) have anything to do with her approval rating and my support? Hey, I never claimed to be perfect did I? On the other hand, I'm the guy who said Newsweek's homeliest writer should be on TV! I said that everytime she uttered a sentence -- she's extremely bright -- she got better looking. If I listened to her for an hour, she'd start looking Miss Universe. There's nothing more attractive than smart and tough. "Beauty fades, but brains never wither."

At this rate, Sanity, I'll be promoting you for V-P . . . and, of course, for Miss Universe.

My affection for you, Bruce, Wil, and Sandra is boundless. I'll look her up on RedState.

I promise to be a more frequent visitor. I have been up to my eyeballs in various projects, but they have to dropped down to my chin, so I have a little more time.

steve

As you know, I agree totally with your position on immigration. I believe you're writing some of the very best material on Townhall. The "poobahs" of TH, especially the ridiculous Romneyite Hugh Hewitt will not recognize your excellence, but the very best people on this site are well aware of you.

I don't agree with you that all is lost for 2008. It will be hard to retake the Senate, and the National Republican Congressional Committee has never been synonymous with political wisdom. But it's critical to take at least one House. As we're seeing, a Democratic Congress can do major mischief. Also, it has not a clue about the WOT. So, let's keep our focus on winning one House -- along with the "Big House."

On the experience issue, it's less important now than it ever was. You don't have to be an old GUY to be a good President. A lot of the experience gained in Washington -- and some candidates agree, especially the Govenors -- can be a negative. John Edwards ran for V-P with four years in the Senate. Obama has two years in the Senate. Neither has a distinguished record there. Romney has been a financial wheeler-and-dealer (negative experience) and a one-term governor. Fred Thompson did serve 8 years in the Senate but apparently snoozed his way through it.

There will be challenges for Sarah if she comes out of the Northland and somehow -- improbably but very possibly -- gets on the ticket. She should immediately hire you, me, Bruce, Wil, and Sandra as her core campaign staff. She can call Karl Rove once a week and ignore his advice.

Am I kidding about the people she should hire? Not really. She should hire smart people with a lot of common sense and a love for what America truly is. A campaign of ideas! What a novelty.

steve

If illegals can just walk across the border, why do they pay thousands of dollars to coyotes to truck them across? Speaking of driving across a friendly, open, POROUS border, I have colleagues up North who make weekend shopping trips into Canada...where there is a HUGE Moslem community.

And Doc, that leads me to a very important question. If this is all about security...why are you only worried about people who like us enough to want to come work here and be a part of the American dream but NOT about the Canadians who distain us and frequently side with Europe against us?

And boats? There's an ocean between Cuba and Florida...how did Florida get such a large Cubian population...did they swim?

But you know what Doc...none of this matters, really. The Bill will be killed and the GOP will take their marbles and GO HOME.

They will never touch this issue again...and you'll be left with what your conservative icon gave you in 1986...REAL Amnesty.

Happy?

how's this for a scenario?

The GOP totally ignores the illegal immigration issue, allowing the RINO press (Hugh, Ingraham, Beck, Hannity) to continue talking about the issue until short attention span America gets bored.

In the meantime, Hil, Obama, and Edwards fight it out...Hil will win if she has to kill someone off (literally)...

The Right hates Hil almost as much as the Left hates Bush...her being a hair's breath from the oval office WILL unite the Right.

While I truly believe this issue has hurt the GOP big time, we CAN use it to wear out the absolutes and extremes who would otherwise be attacking the GOP candidates for not being Reagan.

"1. Buy boats, SCUBA gear and perhaps submarines in order to flood across the "porous" east and west boundaries?"

Yes, that would be nuts, wouldn't it?

Canary Islands: 3x American illegal immigration as a proportion of population.
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2006_06_20/eu/senegal_canary_islands.htm

I thought at first that it was very professional! Boy, was I wrong. They kept accusing me of being some guy name Demo, they even took one of my blogs down.

I think from your last comment, you saw the atmosphere. Wow! Your "two forms of absolutism" is right on the money. The Right has become as intolerant as the Left.

Oh well, no need to go back over there, I'm not staying in that kind of "insanity."

I'll check out your fight with Peppermint on Sheila's blog. Sheila is on vacation, so she doesn't know anything about all of the commotion.

BTW, it is a very inside group over at Red State. I'm sure they were going bananas over some new people coming in. That's probably why you had some trouble getting a password. They call people "trolls" that don't agree with their opinions and are on the constant lookout for them. I imagine suddenly having Sheila, Wil, Virginia Daddy, you and definite "me" was more than they could take.

One guy told me I needed to do some reading before I would be able to carry on intelligent discussions with them. They also came over and read some of my work here, to try to convince themselves that I am not "Demo," whoever he is, or was. Once they read some of what I wrote here, that really scared them! The consensus was that I was hard to place on the political spectrum, but I am definitely not a conservative!

I thought this was "Twilight Zone" but it seems almost reasonable here now. At least here they are not worried about "trolls."

they love you. But Sandra, if you are blogging to try to convince the other bloggers, you will get frustrated and burnt again.

Most bloggers already have decided what they think and will modify those thoughts somewhat but you won't get them to see the destruction of attacking the only viable party that literally wants to win the WOT.

BUT you DO count Sandra...honestly, to me and others who feel the same way and need to be a part of sane and reasonable conversation every now and then.

And more importantly, you are needed for those who dislike the Left and wanders into TH to see if the Right really is as nutty as the Left claims.

I don't want them running into Peppermint's Let's shoot 'um or Byran's bullying. In the old TH and front page, I fought alone for a very long time...eventually Jim and others started to speak up.

Many feel their party is being hijacked by the extremes, 3rd party wannabes, and Libertarians that hate the GOP almost as much as the Dems.

You do great Sandra but if I may make a few suggestions: (notice I'm being nice because I want you to come back--normally I'd just give you advice whether or not you want it...lol)

1- Your blog is YOUR blog. Do not allow anyone to bully you or call the shots. Byran, Scottie, and just about anyone you can name, tried to do to my blog what they did to yours and it was rather amusing because all the emotional cards that they use on others don't work with me. PLEASE stand up for your right to control your own blog.

2- Frequent my or Steve's blog. You'll get a little more controlled discussion there and be with kindred spirits.

3- As a teacher, you must have come across teenagers (I know you teach college)...one of the way I handle Liberals is to notice how immature they are...the SAME can be said of the absolutes. The impatience and total fantasy demands are not the stuff of adults that have learned that life is full of compromises and setting priorities. Their one line philosophy and chant like labels like "amnesty" is astonishing.

4- The BEST reply is "So?" Which is basically what I am doing...we kill the bill, so? The idea that the GOP will no longer try to make them happy is beyond their comprehension...they are like children who has been threatening to hold their breath until they "die"...and are freaking out at the very idea that the GOP may just walk away.

I've stopped arguing. I've asked Will if he was really willing to wait until that wall was built (Hunter's 14 mile wall took 10 years...our 30 mile stretch of freeway in Hawaii took 40 years...I mean this is a GOVERNMENT project for God's sake!)

I asked Dave why the GOP should "do" anything at all since they don't believe what the GOP says anyway.

And then I asked Peppermint if she really wanted to shoot illegals--and what would she do if the GOP simply took their marbles and went home.

THAT is when all h**l broke loose.

She told me she doesn't give a damn what I think then spent an awfully long time trying to convince me of the merits of her opinion.

Anyway, I'm late for work...will finish when I get back.

I think I will follow them and stay at Townhall. After all, if we let them run us off, they have won. You are absolutely right. There is Sheila, me, you, Dave, Wil, and other excellent bloggers that came by to say farewell, but wished that I would stay.

Talk to you later. I feel much better now.

BTW, one guy over there told me he would not trust the education of his 4 year old daughter to me! I told him that conservatives were getting as bad as liberals with attacks when they have nothing to say. I decided to let them have it!

Take your time, comment on other blogs and when you're ready, make the announcement that you've decided to "try" it once more but lay down your rules.

By the way, one silver lining about all this is that if the absolutes are busy attacking this bill...they aren't beating up the candidates and maybe some of them will actually survive to the general without being mauled to death by the so called conservatives.

Things have settled down at Red State, now that they know I'm not this "troll" guy. My blogs have had incredible success, even though most disagree. They are getting to know me now and it's better. I just put up a new one called "President Bush is a man of integrity."

So, we'll see. Now I know the rules there. I thought that they didn't allow personal attacks but that is not the case. I can handle attacks, I've done it for a while now.

Se, we'll see. A lot of them must have come over here to read my work. My site meter reported 440 visits this week, which is pretty high.

BTW, I saw that people are wondering about Sheila. She's been on vacation.

but I think it's good that they might wonder about Sheila...it might help when you come back. I know that Brian said if you can't take the heat, you shouldn't have disagreed with them or something like that.

Tell me Sandra, what is it with Peppermint? I normally ignore people who rant but this woman sounds almost desperate...do you think it's beginning to dawn on her that the illegal immigration tantrum just might tank the GOP and put Queen Hil in the WH?

I'm on my way out (I know, I'm always going some place--I need a vacation!) but maybe we should think about coming up with ways the absolutes (and I don't mean just in illegal immigration) can approach their issue without sounding nutty.

Oh I don't expect them to "see the light", but in our own minds, we need to know exactly what we want from them, yes?

btw...Michael Medved said that he fears that the extremes have taken over the GOP...and that many of his colleagues were for a worker program when Bush was popular but are now thinking of their ratings and have flipped on this issue to keep/make their ratings...quite sad.

This is why I have continued to post and comment that we need to get and elect more conservative candidates.

Though I like and support the President, his intervention in Penn. made sure we kept Specter in the Senate a RINO backstabber if there ever was one. Senator Chafee in Rhode Island was no great loss.

If you do look to Rudy, he will be good on anti-terror and defense, but you might again wonder about the Christian right complaining that Roe was not overturned, and his stance on 2nd amendment issues. He is not aligned with the base on social issues and for the most part they are the ones that do the heavy lifting in the primaries and help get the candidate nominated.

If you look at the numbers on the immigration bill it's not just the Republican base that's up in arms, it's most Americans when they hear about what this bill [as written] will do.

A VP that will appeal to base is a good idea, but unless the President dies, etc. the VP does not have real power to appoint judges, set policy etc.

"If you look at the numbers on the immigration bill it's not just the Republican base that's up in arms, it's most Americans when they hear about what this bill [as written] will do."

Show me a poll that agrees with that statement and I will show you two more that disagree. Also some of the conclusions on what the bill will accomplish are based in opinion, but written as fact.

This is not to say whether the bill is good or bad, just that the attack is flawed and hopelessly lop sided, making it difficult to give it much credibility.

"A VP that will appeal to base is a good idea, but unless the President dies, etc. the VP does not have real power to appoint judges, set policy etc."

True, but it is done all the time and does work, Dick Cheney is aggressive to Bush's more defensive approach. A strong social conservative VP will indeed make Rudy more palatable to the right.

Also you seem to think that a minority GOP is better than a majority. Some states will not accept a more conservative candidate. Moderates are the only candidate that have a chance of winning.

This was amply demonstrated in 2006 when the Democrats gave up their famous "litmus" test and posted moderate liberals in swing seats.

The majority allows us to move the agenda forward, minority leads to defensive actions attempting to stall the democrat agenda.

Given the two scenarios I know which one I would pick.

I am not looking toward Rudy...It is no secret that I want Hunter but at this point the only way I can see the GOP taking the WH is if we get attacked again...and then they will look toward Rudy because, he is most aligned with 9/11 and the WOT.

This post is about Palin, who I think would be an "interesting" twist for any of the candidates on the GOP ticket, but for Rudy...she would be a promise to the pro-lifers, the NRA, and women, all groups that every responsible pundit on both sides admit are large enough to make or break elections.

Jevica, I am a pragmatist above being an ideologue. My belief in God, the evils of abortion, and 2nd Amendment rights are all quite practical, NOT emotional. I even lean toward the Right because of the two VIABLE parties, the GOP has the better ideas and is the most reasonable.

Wanting the wall and control of illegal immigration isn't an emotional deal for me...I have worked hard for what I have and I have little sympathy for those who are unable to compete and wants the government to protect their jobs and insure wages that employers cannot afford. I have relatives in the medical field so I know the problem is more the lack of torte reform and insurance limitations than the poor who use the ERs as a doctor's office. I don't get hysterical over American Sovereignty or the idea of illegals getting something out of social security if they've spent years contributing to that system.

My reason for wanting to control the borders is simple...I do not want another race of "victims" that will rival and exceed Blacks in their hatred of White Americans (and I am NOT neither White or Black).

That said, here is the problem as I see it...and Jevica you can throw away all those polls because this doesn't take a math genius to figure this out.

1-For those old enough to remember, a double sided wall on the Southern border remind people of the Berlin wall--and makes Reagan's "tear down this wall" look like hypocrisy.

2-We sometimes forget that this politic game cuts both ways. I heard the tone in Senator Kyl's voice when he tried to explain what this bill will do and what can be tweaked...and the caller reacted with the "suggestion" that Kyl wasn't a true conservatiave and should resign. Kyl and the GOP worked their butts off to get something SO conservative that the most conservative among them (Kyle-97% rating) is ok with it...and the absolutes on this issue, led by the RINO press didn't even read it before going balistic.

Jevica, it is part of my job to read people, and mark my words...if this bill is killed without giving it a chance to be modified, Kyl and the GOP will not touch this issue again. (And why should they? No one believes their efforts anyway.)

Instead of you all staying home and teaching the GOP a lesson, they will take their marbles--and go home.

And then what? As you said, don't look toward Queen Hil and company to do anything.

There's the analogy about the used car lot...only in American politics there are only two car lots...one won't let you in the door and the other one just got tired of trying to make a deal.

This bill as written should be killed. Are you OK with this bill?

Why don't they get started tweaking the bill. The GOP has chances to modify [as in McCain's amendment for illegals to pay back taxes]. The efforts that presented us this bill are terrible. The party leaders know what the base wants, why don't they at least try to give it to us?

From what I've heard, I have less problem with this bill than the immigration policy we have NOW. The amnesty left by the great Conservative icon Reagan is horrible. I've got relatives in both California and Texas and the victim mentality of the 2nd generation (and legal by birth) immigrants is sickening. We have GOT to do something about the borders--and I don't mean when we have a perfect bill and a perfect GOP party.

Why won't they start tweaking it? Because the absolutes are so hysterical about what is "supposed" to be in that bill and don't want to listen to anything other than we are going to ship the 12 million (10% or more of our work force) back and station troops with orders to shoot that the GOP with the HIGHEST conservative rating is shaking his head in disbelief.

Jev...do you REALLY believe that the American people will tolerate civilians being shot...rounded up like cattle? The MSM would crucify the GOP with NIGHTLY pictures of families being torn apart and "poor" hard working people on one side of the "fence" and "rich" White people carrying rifles on the other.

If you want to risk the WOT or any other issue on this very real scenario, that is your call...but I'm not. I truly believe that having a Commander in Chief that hates our military is an unfair price for our troops to pay because we want our way on this issue and we want it NOW.

As for why they won't give the base what it wants...because national elections are not won by pleasing a portion of the voters. When one party...ANY party is seen as being controlled by their base, the VERY LARGE majority of Independents get spooked. They want leaders that will consider what THEY want too.

And as I keep saying...and Sandra...and Jim...if you don't play, you can't win anything.

No sensible person is talking about shooting people. I saw one comment on this on a blog, and I believe that person later said they were not serious.

There is 12 to 20 million illegals here, when they come in contact with authorities send them back. They are not supposed to be here, so we should reward them for doing so.

Again no person in the debate on this has suggested shooting people.

The liberal Democrats are controlled by their anti-war base, and I don't see independents being spooked.

The number of people that don't want this bad bill are more than the base.

To legalize the millions of illegals at the stroke of a pen will do nothing more than assure that in another 20 years we will have another 15 or so million illegals to "amnesty"

This bill is very far from perfect.

What do you find good with this bill? What we have now is bad, but to substitute a terrible amnesty will not help.

As you try to make this a racial issue, even Hispanics who are legal do not like the illegals.
The illegals made the issue, we just have to clean up the mess.

That's we should NOT reward them for doing so.

Please read my other posts...I have already answered why I want the illegals to spend the next decade earning citizenship.

I am sorry but to me, the fines and background checks are NOT amnesty nor is it a "reward", although the next time you have to fork over a hefty fine, you are free to tell yourself that you really got amnesty for whatever moving violation you broke.

As for breaking the law...I seem to remember from history books that our founding fathers broke Enland's law when they had their revolution so this "law and order" spin is rather hypocitical for a nation built on law breaking, don't you think?

As for "no sensible person is talking about shooting"...is that what the base is made up of: people suffering from temporary insanity?

Jev, it is THESE people, who are so emotional about this issue that they spew nonsense about killing civilians that will make sure that our southern borders remain porous...it will remain so to "prove" to the rest of America that Conservatives are NOT racist.

I realise that this may be a foreign concept in the idealogical debate, but I would much rather spend that time, getting on with putting up that wall, carding the illegals, sending the criminals back, and collecting $6000 a piece (x 20 million--you do the math) for those who want citizenship to fund this whole government program.

Fine only if you want to be a citizen. Otherwise just get visa and keep renewing it. No fine=zero.

Background check. Done in 24 hours or they get visa.

Seems like amnesty. They get to stay and don't have to pay anything [unless they want to be a citizen].

I'm not a racist, and I'm against illegal immigration, I don't want to shoot anyone. Actually it's not a racial problem at all it's against illegal immigration.

I'm rather surprised you go back 200 years to the founding of the country to denounce those who want our laws followed. The Declaration listed reasons why we were dissatisfied, if the crown had changed its ways might not have been a revolution. But it didn't and their was [a revolution] and we became independent.

Do you believe that 20 million illegals will want to become citizens?

First, sorry, but this has to be short as I'm off to work.

Actually I find it hard to believe that anyone wants to willingly give up the country they were born in and the country that their families are still in.

In 1986 when Reagan gave real amnesty, not everyone rushed forward to become American citizens.

I think, if given an option, they will come here and work and then go home. I believe in the free market system...yes even for workers. If the need is there, they will fill it.

But even if one tenth of that 20 million pays that fine, that's still enough to run this program for awhile and will be a whole lot cheaper than sending 20 million back (not just in transportation but in lost taxes and contribution to a social security system they will never collect on.)

Please check on the background checks...they will get a temporary visa BUT they have to submit to background checks that takes time...and ALL that time they will have to be monitored...which is a he** of a lot better that what we have now.

As for going back 200 years...is there a time when breaking the law becomes forgivable...and if so, how about 20 years? 15? 10? (This is starting to sound like the bargin made with God over a city of sinners.)

Point is, if breaking the law automatically makes something wrong, then breaking the laws of England when our Founding Fathers were under it was wrong...this nation was founded on a wrong act...and if the illegal immigration's reasons having no bearing, then neither does our Founding Fathers.

You can't have it both ways Jevica.

Interesting blog...I personally could care less if a woman gets the WH...I want someone who will be an extremely strong leader, in the face of all the global dangers we face...if it happens to be a woman, she better be like Prime Minister Thatcher! Don't know enough about Palin, but will check her out...

Btw, just checked into TH last night after getting back from a trip, and posted a new blog today...

Had some probs over at Sandra's after registering and commenting...somehow I disappeared! Am having it checked out. She seems to be enjoying it over there...:)

I'm not planning on going anywhere...will be a commenter over there only, I think.

Welcome back...I think you scared everyone...they thought you'd left like Sandra :)

Sorry about the big "discussion" with Peppermint. She addressed ME; I really dislike useless discussion and it was clear that I was wasting my breath as she didn't want to hear anything I said. I did wonder if she addressed me because she still had something to say to Sandra and Sandra was gone.

In any case, I'm glad you're sticking around and I hope Sandra will come back.

As I told Sandra; the absolutes have already made up their mind. It's those who wander in or those who just read that need to know not everyone is inflexable on the Right.

I think Palin is an interesting twist. We are a nation of American Idol watchers...she will add glamour and glitz being an ex beauty queen and a sport star. She will also be a promise to the pro-lifers, the 2nd ammendment people, and women.
And most of all, she will go toe to toe with Queen Hil...she's younger, prettier, bright, and extremely popular.

And after this illegal immigration hype, honestly Sheila, the GOP is going to need a miracle.

Wil has a great blog up...I agree with a lot of what he says. Check it out.

Thanks for the kind words...and I hope Sandra comes back too.

I'm keeping a positive attitude about an 08 victory. A lot can happen between now and then.

Has Palin said she's interested in running? I hadn't heard anything about her...

I was going to comment on your blog but as with Sandra, the bullies have taken over and I don't want to turn your blog into a screaming match. I understand that you are just trying to be nice with your pleas for a truce, but as Brian made clear, YOUR blog will operate according to HIS wishes.

Oh well, Steve seems to think you're brilliant (I agree) and you'll get a real discussion over there.

Palin has not expressed any interest in running...though I've never heard any potential candidate say outright that they want the VP job. Palin has said she's not going to run for Senate in 2008 if T. Stevens retires, and some people have used that to tell me that she wouldn't be interested in the VP job (she used the phrase "national office"). However, I don't think she has considered the Vice Presidency...

As she seems very ambitious, I would expect her to take the VP slot with open arms if it is offered to her...and to seek Stevens' senate seet in 2014 if she's not VP.

I have always liked him, and he has a wide range of appeal...just a different thought. I'll check out Palin sometime soon.

By the way, thanks for the compliment Sheila...so far, the only person who has commented who I annoyed was Brian, and he is still civil in his disagreement. I wonder Sanity if you will agree with me. It isn't the position you have taken either, but I think its the right one.

I did read your essay about Bush and wasn't going to comment because I really dislike spending time writing post after post when I know that nothing will be gained by doing so.

But you asked and so I did comment.

I will check out Watts...but I need to tell you that my reasons for considering Sara is because of what she brings to the table...female, ex-beauty queen, ex-basketball star. These things add glitz and would make her very conservative views "forgivable" to an American Idol watching America.

no he wasn't a beauty queen, but he is a minority and former football star, and was a very eloquent voice for conservatism throughout his years in the house. Its just a thought.

And for the record, I am not offended by your thoughts on my blog, if I didn't want them, I wouldn't ask. You have a very different perspective than I do, and I appreciate it. My seemingly pointless post had a goal of sounding out a middle ground...getting the absolute Bush supporters to recognize that the man is not perfect, and his comments about bill opponents did far more harm than good, yet getting the growing right wing Bush Derangement Syndrome folks (who are nowhere near the insanity of the left wing virulent version) to recognize that the constant barrage of Bush Sucks is not helping them pursue a better immigration bill, is not helping us continue to fight the war, and is not helping our 08 election chances.

Some who are angry were agreeable to the idea of simply letting him lead and for the most part ignoring him unless he proposes something that does more harm, focusing instead on the future. The most vocal (Brian) was not agreeable to that compromise, and some of his friends in that camp either did not read my post, or did not choose to comment, which is fine. Brians criticism, while reasoned and not shrill, was just as unwilling to compromise as yours was, but some who are angry (like Doc Steech) saw the point I wanted to make.

I am fine with that, all I wanted to do was propose compromise and see the result. I appreciate the response from both ends, yours as I did Brians. And now I am satisfied to just agree to disagree.

Brian refuses to compromise...that's MY point. Did you read Sheila's blog where she tried numerous times to come to an agreement to disagree?

I actually agree with you that it serves no purpose other than helping the Dems seem loyal and reasonable (and electible), but I disagree with you that Bush doesn't matter anymore. I believe he will go down in history as one of the great presidents ever. If he never gave two nations the bill of rights (an INCREDIBLE feat), stopped female apartheid in those nations, and impossibly turned over a post 9/11 economy in war time...he would still be great because he and he alone is the man the terrorist fears.

When he is gone, people will remember and the abortion issue (one of the issues of which I am an absolutist) and the illegal immigration issue will seem petty compared to dealing with terrorist groups intent on paying us back for pretty much neutralized their terror for 8 years.

Do not put me in the same boat as Brian. I am a pragmatist...I compromise where I have to and don't use buzz words like "principle" to excuse using a party, attacking a war time president, or threatening to hold my breath until I die.

I do not tell people to shut up and I do not try to make the rules in other people's blog. I do not think it's "fun" to waste my time arguing like a door to door religious salesman.

And above all, I don't chase people out of their own blog and then imply that they have no courage for not sticking around and wasting their time.

Don't worry about the B man...he won't run my blog.

I am totally excited after the debates last night!

Wow! Our guys are sharp, and making the press and the robot left look BAD!

As I said at my place, our guys hit it out of the park last night, and put Blitzed in his place!

Rudy knocked the Libby issue out of the park, Huckabee was awesome on the "gotcha" evolution question, I was LOVING it!

No one can get me down...we have the advantage! We're hot and doing great!

Our guys looked smart, fun, likeable, qualified, and not the gruff mean ol' conservatives the press would love to convince everyone our side is...

I LOVED showing Wolf Blitzed who is in control of the issues and the debate...YES!

You are right, there is a big difference in style, I was simply saying you are the two most vocal on opposte sides of this issue.

I also agree that when history judges, Bush will be considered great for having the foresight to attempt to change the equation in the Middle East, not simply say that Arabs cannot live in a Constitutioal Republic. I was simply trying to make the point that for those who have given up on him, ignoring him and looking to the future is the best option and the most productive. But there are some unwilling to even consider that. At least I tried.

speaking for the many that are not in the extreme category, and who seem to have no voice in the conservative media.

I've had a knock down drag out over there. The last blog has 306 comments. I finally took off the gloves with those guys. BTW, no women over there. Only had one so far commented on one blog. The guys try to talk down to me as "you know who" does here. My blogs have been recommended and are getting quite a few hits.

So, the battle for "reason" goes on!

Sandra, I intended to comment over there but the site lost me somehow, It said I did not have authority to comment and when i tried to log in, it wouldn't let me.

I read your brawl on the comment line, and found it interesting.

I think it is a fine line and very pinpoint distinction between reasonable compromise and selling out. Sometimes, the lines get blurred. I am really enjoying this blogging thing though, because other than my mom (who occasionally comments as keeps and lives about 600 miles away), no one in my "real" life even wants to discuss politics. So blogging lets me explore issues a bit more deeply, and the debates sharpen and clarify my views, even when it occasionally gets ugly.

I think you can mention Brian by name as I doubt he comes to my blog anymore.

I have a post in mine about you two :) I'll try to get to it soon.

I've noticed that some of those who comment on your new blog is from the old TH...one guy fight4right HATES me with a passion...have fun trying to get those people to see reason :)

Although to be fair...I did get a few of them to stop bashing Bush. I asked what would THEY do if they were president. It took a bit of posting, but they realized that in the world of politics you really can't make everyone happy. Another got angry because I kept bring up his beloved Reagan and how he failed to do any of the things that this poster was demanding of Bush. Ed got sooooooooo angry one day, he wrote a long post of how HIGHLY offended he was at me attacking his beloved president...to which I asked, "then why is ok for you to attack mine?"

He apologized and never did it again.

But fight4right never forgave me...I'm not sure what I said but he lost a debate with me and spent many a post alternately ignoring me and trying to trap me. I told him to go home, that he was out of his league.

Someone rushed to his defense, telling me how "mean" I was to which I replied..."and?"

Sorry...but in reading your blog...it brought back memories...grin.

you need to be careful not to get burnt out. Trying to get both sides to agree to disagree is a thankless job and frustrating as all get out.

Keep saying hi for me to Sheila and Sandra. They both get A-plus.