It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why I Am Turning Republican

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 04:13 AM
link   
I am turning Republican because I have made critical errors in judgement by relying on conspiracy and radical left wing websites which distorted the reality of the war on the ground. I was against war and felt sorry for the Iraq citizens.

However, now that I have had a chance to see the Democratic Presidential platform and have discovered much of the radical left wing bias to be exaggerated, I have found that the Republicans meant well when they were trying to defend the nation against terrorism.

If you notice, much of the Democratic platform on defense tries to agree with the Bush
agenda. Well, you don't get much more experienced on defense than Wesley Clark, and
Colin Powell. And since the Democrats like Joe Biden and John Kerry voted for the
war, they must have for a reason. I now believe those reasons to be correct.

So from now on, I will support the war and the troops, and President Bush. I had believed his "your for us , or against us" was kind of mean and making enemies, but after thinking it over in the context of the seriousness of the risks, I feel he was correct.

It is easy to become embroiled in emotional issues like war and death when the news
messengers distort or exaggerate facts. Its easy not to trust news sources too when they try to conceal or ignore certain facts also. But now I understand it was for national security.

One commentator on Larry King Live said, "The Bill Of Rights is not a suicide pact."
I think I understand now. The United States military has a lot of work to do in protecting
America and we should support them in every way we can because they are making
the country safer.

To all the people in the military and overseas, I sincerely apologize for misunderstanding the situation of the Iraq war and speaking out so vehemently against it. We have left-wing radio here, Pacifica KPFK (90.7) which broadcasts many negative comments about the war and its easy to feel angry when the message is distorted and things are exaggerated. I am sorry my comments were unduly harsh, but it was due mainly because of my religion where killing, is of course, wrong.

Much of the left wing press had been exaggerated esp. on the internet and it reinforced this perception. I feel that these people are doing a great disservice to the nation now, and think their attempts at reporting are misguided.

If the issue is safety and the government says its important then I believe them, and
trust they know what they are doing for the freedom of our nation, and to make security safer for democracies of the world.

[Edited on 23-2-2004 by darkwraith]




posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 04:41 AM
link   
You do not have to be republican or democrat. You can have views of both parties. It is only limmiting thinking "I am a republican" or "I am a democrat". It is better to think, I am my self with my own views.



Wait till colonel reads this thread. I wonder if he can make a response without calling you a repugnant. Nothing against you colonel just wondering.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 04:59 AM
link   
It is important to clear things up for others because they may fall into the same trap of believing the same conspiracy web sites and cause them not to support the people working hard to defeat the terrorists.

Mostly, its a matter of honesty. We should be honest with each other so as not to breed mistrust and division within our people. I think the Democrats and their left wing writers in magazines like "The Nation" stirred up a great discontent.

They made us afraid we were losing our Democracy and had us believe our liberties and freedom were usurped by evil doers inside the government. That was wrong and I don't think I can support a party that frightens me to get votes in that manner.





[Edited on 23-2-2004 by darkwraith]



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 05:46 AM
link   
I'm not sure if you are serious or not, but if you are, here you go.

Coming from on conservative to another, I'd like to comment about some things you said (not an attack).



Originally posted by darkwraith
I am turning Republican because I have made critical errors in judgement by relying on conspiracy and radical left wing websites which distorted the reality of the war on the ground. I was against war and felt sorry for the Iraq citizens.

Relying on any one type of media in this country is a bad idea. It's to the point that I get half of the news from outside the US, although there are a good many biased folks there too, but not like here.

However, now that I have had a chance to see the Democratic Presidential platform and have discovered much of the radical left wing bias to be exaggerated, I have found that the Republicans meant well when they were trying to defend the nation against terrorism.

If you mean Congress, then I agree. I do not agree so much with Bush. He has let slide some serious security failures

If you notice, much of the Democratic platform on defense tries to agree with the Bush
agenda. Well, you don't get much more experienced on defense than Wesley Clark, and
Colin Powell. And since the Democrats like Joe Biden and John Kerry voted for the
war, they must have for a reason. I now believe those reasons to be correct.

So from now on, I will support the war and the troops, and President Bush. I had believed his "your for us , or against us" was kind of mean and making enemies, but after thinking it over in the context of the seriousness of the risks, I feel he was correct.

I think it's bull# if you ask me. I don't know who he is trying to be, but if Bush thinks that it is ok to shoot out remarks like that when there is serious dissent among his people, then I think he is wrong. He is never clear about what he is talking about. He does not give us any specifics, etc. The public need something to go on here, there is almost rioting in the streets sometimes.

It is easy to become embroiled in emotional issues like war and death when the news messengers distort or exaggerate facts. Its easy not to trust news sources too when they try to conceal or ignore certain facts also. But now I understand it was for national security.

National Security. ~sigh~ this is a real gripe of mine. How is it, that he can ask us American's to give up certain freedoms for security (which is crap unless we are under attack or in a state of emergency) then why is he allowing Mexicans and other unmentionables to stroll across the border all fancy free? Makes no sense. There is a major unregulated and undocumentable access point in America. Does he think terrorists just don't know about it?

One commentator on Larry King Live said, "The Bill Of Rights is not a suicide pact."
I think I understand now. The United States military has a lot of work to do in protecting
America and we should support them in every way we can because they are making
the country safer.

True, we can't blame them for the politics, much like in Vietnam.

To all the people in the military and overseas, I sincerely apologize for misunderstanding the situation of the Iraq war and speaking out so vehemently against it. We have left-wing radio here, Pacifica KPFK (90.7) which broadcasts many negative comments about the war and its easy to feel angry when the message is distorted and things are exaggerated. I am sorry my comments were unduly harsh, but it was due mainly because of my religion where killing, is of course, wrong.

Much of the left wing press had been exaggerated esp. on the internet and it reinforced this perception. I feel that these people are doing a great disservice to the nation now, and think their attempts at reporting are misguided.

They have their agendas to push just like the Republicans, it's no different except that the Dems are out of power so they are making a bigger racket.

If the issue is safety and the government says its important then I believe them, and
trust they know what they are doing for the freedom of our nation, and to make security safer for democracies of the world.

As an american, and a conservative, you have a duty NOT to trust the government to dictate actions unregulated. We can either take action in what we believe or sit and not complain about what we did not work to avoid.

[Edited on 23-2-2004 by darkwraith]


Anyway, I'd encourage you to steer clear of the Republican party til they get back to basics.

We need a real overhaul in there before I stick my neck in that noose again.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 07:03 AM
link   
I thought you already were Republican the way you bash Kerry and Edwards.

In case you come to your senses: www.deaniacsforedwards.com...



That is of course unless you suddenly became anti-choice overnight. There are other issues besides the war you know.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkwraith
If the issue is safety and the government says its important then I believe them, and
trust they know what they are doing for the freedom of our nation, and to make security safer for democracies of the world.



You trust who...the politicians.? These people lie for a living. . .



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkwraith
The United States military has a lot of work to do in protecting
America and we should support them in every way we can because they are making
the country safer.

To all the people in the military and overseas, I sincerely apologize for misunderstanding the situation of the Iraq war and speaking out so vehemently against it.


There is nothing wrong with speaking out against the war, before it happens. Obviously, bitching about it after the fact doesnt bring our troops back any faster, so there is just no point in it. I support anyone who stands up for their views. I am not pro-war, but I sure as hell am pro-troops. I was totaly against the war from day one. The second the troops left, I supported them with everything I have. They are over there fighting for us in one way or another, believe it or not, and it is rediculous to not support them. Some people call them killers. Some call them heros. Whatever you call them, they are doing their job, and they dont have any choice, so lets support them, so they have a reason to want to come home!!

my $.02

[Edited on 23-2-2004 by Milk]



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 08:32 AM
link   
But just how old are you? You had some good satire going there until you showed you were sincere.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 08:39 AM
link   
As one who supported the war (and one of only a few here), even I will admit that it had little to do with terrorism...

Saddam was put out of power for one reason, and one reason only...the increasing threat to our nation's economy, caused by his lobbying to convert other nations to the Euro as far as how they affected the oil reserves... That however, wouldn't sell to the public at large, so the WMD bit was concocted.... (you would think that they would have at least planted some, but that just shows you the level of incompetence....as they thought they'd actually find some...bad intel).

Of course, you have to expect to have bad intel, when a ruler is surrounded by nothing but relatives, getting rich off him....(i.e. see Osama too).

I supported the war, but not for the stated reasons, (even though I'd often cite them in my arguements, just for fun...)

However, there were side objectives to be sure, such as Saddam's financing of certain terrorist acts, and groups (most notably, the $10,000 reward to any suicide bomber's family)....

Both the Dems and Reps are crooked as hell....but old money is more prominent in the Reps camp...thus, I am actually now a registered Dem, after years of being a Repugnant...



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Make sure you look at the many aspects. The economy, environment, education, etc.

Bush's environmental policy continues to have many children obtain the wonderful treat of child asthma.

That is just one thing. There are many more.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Yes, Bush sucks on the economy, but there is two sides to every arguement.

Who stands to gain by holding off on environmental concerns?

That being said, I do have to note that Bush is straight across the board against a cleaner environment.

I just don't think it's on his major 1st term hit list. Perhaps it's a 2nd term game plan.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 02:19 PM
link   
I think everyone is dissatisfied with what is going on in our government right now. We can't just blame one of the parties. We have to be realisitic, and realize that the whole damn system is in the crapper. The people have no voice, and its sad that you so willingly give yours away because one or two reports, and that goes for your left leanings and now your right.

The coming years are so important. The choice you make at polls in November will effect all of us for years to come. I believe we all need to step back and take a good look at the men. Try to envision his perfect United States. You have to learn to listen to what comes out of the man's mouth...not to what some political pundit said about what he said on some guys show that is set up to sell some global corporations product.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   
The world is full of dangers by outside forces and I think the nation's people need to heal from almost four years of being combative between the citizenry.

All the 9-11 conspiracy stuff is just crap to sell books. It has no basis in reality. To say its Bush's fault for 9-11 or to say there were people at fault is being way too harsh. They were caught by surprise and its wrong to blame the government in the event of unforseen tragedy.

There are way too many conspiracy sites and radio programs propping up this nonsense with all manner of paranoia. The French then came out with books saying we knew this and that about 9-11, and people started throwing around terms like "cabal" which is complete nonsense.

Now, I've studied journalism since high school and college and we are people who read and research. Along with political science and history, I've scarcely found a better case study than the one we have today regarding the media's role during the war on terror.

The people need to be protected, from information as well as graphic depictions. Embedded journalists are necessary because the people need not see the things that might disrupt national security. Most people cannot stomach the violence and turmoil, and it is too disturbing for the average person. The morale and the protection of the troops is of the utmost importance, as we need to afford them every advantage in the field.

90% of the things the left wing points out are exaggerations and posturing. George W. and his administration are not some group of people taking away liberties by having restrictions on reporting during war-time. The flow of information is a main part of strategy and its neccessary to get Americans to support difficult operations with regards to the national agenda.

The Patriot Act, which is something I have been harping on for years now, is not a threat to us as Americans either.The left-wing has been using the fear of Ashcroft
poking around in your files as some scare tactic to get donations. Its sad, really. These people know how to run a war, and they were just keeping up to date with technology and survelliance to combat the enemy.

Again, if there are military families here and were offended by the anti
government rhetoric I wrote on here, I apologize.





[Edited on 23-2-2004 by darkwraith]

[Edited on 23-2-2004 by darkwraith]



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 04:40 PM
link   
You are wrong about the patriot act. Two prominent conservative Republicans joined the ACLU after retirement recently because of their concern on civil liberties. Dick Armey was one of them.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 04:57 PM
link   

So from now on, I will support the war and the troops, and President Bush. I had believed his "your for us , or against us" was kind of mean and making enemies, but after thinking it over in the context of the seriousness of the risks, I feel he was correct.


you do realize you probably have the same chances of being gang-raped to death by a group of lesbian girl scouts as you do being killed by a terrorist, right?

i also respect your new found opinions but something tells me you'll change them again within a few years.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkwraith

The people need to be protected, from information as well as graphic depictions. Embedded journalists are necessary because the people need not see the things that might disrupt national security. Most people cannot stomach the violence and turmoil, and it is too disturbing for the average person.



Are you speaking of the reality of wars and combat? I don't like hearing that I need to be protected from information. There's nothing wrong in being disturbed, reality comes in all forms. I'm not saying we should show children graphic images, but the average person should go out there and get an idea of what's going on in the world instead of flying a kite all the time. That kite is bound to lose wind and fall to your feet.

Anyways, happy happy joy joy in finding yourself, as a Republican that is.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by enomus

So from now on, I will support the war and the troops, and President Bush. I had believed his "your for us , or against us" was kind of mean and making enemies, but after thinking it over in the context of the seriousness of the risks, I feel he was correct.


you do realize you probably have the same chances of being gang-raped to death by a group of lesbian girl scouts as you do being killed by a terrorist, right?


Tell that to the people who lost their lives on Sept. 11, or in the first WTC bombing, or in the OKC bombing or in the Unibomber bombings, or in the DC Sniper shootings, or in the numerous embassy bombings in the last decade. As much as I welcome the thought of being gang-raped to death by lesbian women, I think chances are [understated] slightly [/understated] better that I will be killed by an act of terrorism.

[Edited on 23-2-2004 by Milk]



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Tell that to the people who lost their lives on Sept. 11, or in the first WTC bombing, or in the OKC bombing or in the Unibomber bombings, or in the DC Sniper shootings, or in the numerous embassy bombings in the last decade.


tally all those numbers and tell me what they come to. then lets compare those to the top 1000 leading causes of death in the U.S. and let's see what we're really talking about...i'd say we were in the 1 in 1,000,000 range at least.

i'm just saying lets be realistic, the chances of any american dying from a terrorist action is pretty slim and in no way, shape or form justifies the human lose and resources that are currently being utilized on this so called 'war' on terrorism. in my not-so-humble opinion, of course.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by enomus

Tell that to the people who lost their lives on Sept. 11, or in the first WTC bombing, or in the OKC bombing or in the Unibomber bombings, or in the DC Sniper shootings, or in the numerous embassy bombings in the last decade.


tally all those numbers and tell me what they come to. then lets compare those to the top 1000 leading causes of death in the U.S. and let's see what we're really talking about...i'd say we were in the 1 in 1,000,000 range at least.

i'm just saying lets be realistic, the chances of any american dying from a terrorist action is pretty slim and in no way, shape or form justifies the human lose and resources that are currently being utilized on this so called 'war' on terrorism. in my not-so-humble opinion, of course.



NOTE TO SELF:
Find where being gang raped by lesbian girl scouts ranks on the list of the 1000 leading causes of death.

The chances ARE pretty slim, but who is to say what they could be were this left alone, and swept under the rug. Im sure at one time, the chances of being killed by an act of terrorism in Isreal, or Palestine WERE very slim, no?



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 06:04 PM
link   
www.belowtopsecret.com...

Blah, blah, blah. Not buying it DW. You're either legitimately schizophrenic or one of those dangerous "all or nothing" extremist people.

I've got a friend that has two modes he operates between, witnessing bible thumping Christian or Church burning atheist and changes every year or so. But he's really crazy...what's up with you "neocon weenie" (your words).

www.belowtopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join