RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Missouri Young Republicans?

["F Vernon Green" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

You might not like it, but the country needs a leader, not someone that
looks at polling data and changes his mind based on the popular opinion.
That is a dangerous precedent and one that allowed Osama Bin Laden to
flourish under Clinton. Clinton would not do anything about Bin Laden, even
though he identified him as a threat because he felt that the American
populace would not like the idea.

That is the problem, 3,000 people died because of Clinton watching and
reading polls and deciding to act or not act based on the way the wind was
blowing. You might not like the idea that Bush went into Iraq, but he was a
leader by choosing an unpopular course of action and acting on it. I wonder
if your opinion on this would be any different if Gore or Kerry were the one
that went into Iraq. You see you cannot have it both ways.

Clinton got us involved in Somalia and in Bosnia, both of these countries
posed no immediate threat to the US but it was felt at the time he needed to
act, where were you with these actions? What were you saying about Clinton
when they drug our service men through the streets of Somalia and
dismembered them? Is it different because Clinton was a democrat? Apparently
it is because we had no more business being in those countries than we did
Iraq. If I remember correctly, we got involved in Bosnia against the wishes
of the UN as well.

-----Original Message-----
From: EMAIL:PROTECTED
[mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Miller
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 8:55 AM
To: MLUG Off-Topic Discussion
Subject: RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Missouri Young Republicans?

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, F Vernon Green wrote:

> I think for many people Bush was a vote against the Ivy League crowd 
> that have been in power for so long.

That's interesting.  Bush went to Yale and was a member of Skull and 
Bones.  Your blood can't get any bluer than that!!  Are people falling for 
his fake Texas accent?  (He didn't grow up in Texas.)


> There are always those people out there, dare I say a lot like Mike here,
> that no matter what, come hell or high water they are going to vote
> democratic.

I voted for a Republican once - Scott Klug in Madison, WI.  His opponent 
seemed extremely naive.  Scott did fairly well.  I would vote for more 
Republicans but I have to have good reasons.  If I don't know anything 
about the candidates, I usually don't vote.


> To me Kerry is like Clinton, he is taking a page from the Clinton 
> playbook, the difference is he does not have the looks and personality 
> to pull it off.

Well, Clinton was very good for our country, so I'd be happy to have a 
Clintonesque leader even if he isn't as good looking as Clinton.


> With Bush you might not like his stand on things, but it is pretty 
> certain that he is not going to flip flop on it because popular opinion 
> says that he should. In this case he is leading and not following. A 
> leader is not defined by always doing what the masses want, where is the 
> leadership in that? A leader is defined by making the tough choices that 
> on the surface might be unpopular, but at least he feels they are right. 
> I think in Bush you have this for good or bad and people actually 
> recognize it.

Of course, the problem is that Bush will 'lead' us into things we don't 
want.  I'll take a good follower over a bad leader any day!  ;-)

Mike
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion