President Bush's Message to the Grassroots: "I Need You"

Bush Team Leaders ^ | 10/28/03 | President George W. Bush

[Luis Gonzalez]

Well, well, well...

Smug and somewhat of a boor, aren't you?

The AFP is the last hold out of whatever is left of the Know-nothings, Birchers, and generally speaking any fringe national socialist group remaining out there.

Nothing that the AFP stands for has ever been considered to be a conservative principle at any time in this nation's history, nothing that you stand for will ever be.

Their policies are destructive, which is why they have never garnered any support in mainstream politics, as most peple are sufficiently intelligent to see right through them.

I'm neither young, nor inexperienced, and I have noticed that rather than discussing issues, you rely on the last resort of anyone with no point to make, and no way to support their argument...you attack the opponent.

I am discussing issues, and the moment I asked who you supported for the presidency, your answer was basically "I won't know until I am told by the Party".

How pathetic is that?

[Fred Mertz]

Speaking of boors....

[FITZ]

Alien Acts did not afford immigration the right of a fair trial. Suspicion alone was reason enough for the deportation of a non-citizen,

Most illegals will go for the deportation without a fair trial --- for very good reason. They are given the option around here if caught --- they will choose being taken back to the border with no trial ---- going to trial means it goes on their record. If they just go back to Mexico, they can get back over here that much quicker and have no record.

[Cultural Jihad]

Just keep in mind that when you pull the R lever - you are voting for a person that has very similiar policies as the previous one.

By golly, I see your point. Neither party wants to torch the public schools and libraries, set up machinegun nests on the borders, or build concentration work camps for illegals, the handicapped, and the retarded! When, O, when will we ever get any real electoral choices?!

[Cultural Jihad]

... and have no record.

I find that hard to believe that no record is kept on someone being deported. Being an illegal entrant is a misdemeanor.

[FITZ]

Ask one ---- around here --- I don't know about further north, if they pick up an illegal they will just take them and let them go back to Mexico --- if they don't get processed then they don't get it on their record. Sitting around waiting for a trial isn't something most will choose. They'll choose the deportation without a trial --- then they head right back over.

[Cultural Jihad]

Even so, being deported on a misdemeanor charge without a trial is not the same as not having a record.

[FITZ]

I can guarantee you many just get a ride in the green van back to the border --- they get held until there are enough brought in, they are taken to the border, the gate is opened, and they walk back over to Mexico. No processing, no crime record --- not even a misdemeanor. And most will opt for this. What happens --- if the border patrol stops and questions someone who is here illegally, they'll try to get them to say where they're working or living --- the illegal doesn't tell them for the obvious reasons, they are offered a ride back to Mexico --- which they take and out they go. But they come right back --- and have no record. Like I said --- further north it might be different --- I don't know about that.

[Valentine_W]

You know, there is a difference between legal and illegal immigrants. For the most part, illegal immigration was not a problem in 1798.

[FITZ]

I think voluntary departure --- (no deportation trial) applies to people who were here legally also ---- I'm not sure about that. I'm not sure the legal difference between legal and illegal immigrants ---- they are both non-citizens. I know illegal immigrants can also be subject to fair trials and all that which get on their record if they don't choose the voluntary departure route or were involved in some other crime.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Speaking of boors..."

...you show up!

[jmc813]

You will playing into their set-up. You will create their martyrs. It will all be filmed and documented, more gun control laws will be passed by "popular demand" and more nails in the coffin will be driven.

If firearms are banned, what diference will more gun laws make at that point? Like I said, it was a hypotetical that I posed to you anyway, so hopefully it will never come to that.

[jmc813]

Neither party wants to torch the public schools and libraries

Neither does anyone here, but do you agree that we would be better off if education was left to the private sector?

or build concentration work camps for illegals, the handicapped, and the retarded!

Name one FReeper who supports concentration camps.

[Isolationist]

>>you rely on the last resort of anyone with no point to make, and no way to support their argument...you attack the opponent<<

You mean like this statement: “Yeah...making all sorts of crazy promises for crazy people,” #529. If you want to name call and call people crazy who have a different perspective on things – I can just as easily throw it back.

But if you want to discuss the issue, let’s discuss:

>>Nothing that the AFP stands for has ever been considered to be a conservative principle at any time in this nation's history, nothing that you stand for will ever be.<<

Wrong: Here are a couple of points form the AFP website:

* The America First Party shall strongly support the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

* Not rewarding illegal immigrants for breaking the law by granting them temporary or permanent legal status (amnesty).

* A national campaign to assimilate new immigrants by teaching them the English language and encouraging them to learn about American history, government, and civic culture.

* The United States military will only be used to protect U.S. citizens, U.S. property and U.S. border integrity

* Pass a Balanced Budget Amendment

* The America First Party calls for the elimination of all laws that grant Special Privileges or Protection for any race or group. Affirmative Action creates inequality before the Law, and only serves to fracture our national unity.

Several of the AFP’s core issues are closer to traditional core conservative values than today’s Republican party. Today’s Republican Party is closer to a JFK Democrat.

>>Their policies are destructive, which is why they have never garnered any support in mainstream politics, as most peple are sufficiently intelligent to see right through them.<<

I’ll give you half credit – Would they ever garner mainstream support – most likely not mostly because the Democrats and Republicans did an excellent job in conditioning people in believe that a 3rd party doesn’t stand a chance to getting elected and if elected they have little chance of getting things done. Democrats and Republicans will grudgingly work with each other – but introduce Libertarian, Reform, or Green or another type of 3rd Party into the equation and look at how quickly they react to stomp them out. The mere mention of the AFP got several fangs out quickly.

As to their policies being destructive – let me know how one of my above statements from the AFP is destructive?

And just to save you some time – I more than positive you can pull an article or two about how the AFP will “Destroy America” and quite frankly – depending upon the article I might even agree with a point or two. But the difference is that you insinuate that if any AFP’s platforms are introduced it will destroy America and that all AFP platforms are evils and wrong. So address how any of the above AFP points are destructive.

>>>I am discussing issues, and the moment I asked who you supported for the presidency, your answer was basically "I won't know until I am told by the Party". How pathetic is that?<<<

You act as if the presidential election is next Tuesday instead of a year from next Tuesday. The ballot is nowhere close to be finalizing. But you have already made your choice without knowing who will be on the ballot – to me that’s the real definition of being pathetic and in reality you are the one who is simply doing as you are told instead of thinking for yourself. I prefer to wait and see – and yes the AFP is one candidate I’m interesting in seeing as I’m assuming the other parties I’m interested in will run the same candidate as they did in 2000.

And FYI - I would consider my smug attitude part of my charm.

[Mudboy Slim]

HERE it is then...it's an eye-opener...MUD

[txrangerette]

On my system, this info showed so
small I could barely see it.

But a few thoughts occur...FIRST,
I said the overall size of Gov.
grew under Reagan, it did not
shrink. As Guv of CA & as Prez.
And I meant domestic discretionary
NOT military, Medicare, Medicaid,
AFDC, EITC, etc. I can't be sure
what this info shows about that,
as it compares Reagan to Dubya in
first 3 yrs of first term. If I'm
wrong in what I stated(not by a
standard set by another) I'll say
so. Can't tell from this.

Categories are selective...what
about block grants to states? A
lot of that was done for added
flexibility, causing reshuffing
of $$$ into different categories.

Significant, too, the conservative
Reagan didn't cut the WELFARE ST.
(non-discretionary cradle-to-the-
grave stuff) to less than when he
took office. Still thought of as
a conservative, though, while many
hard righters were mad at him for
not trying.

A CATO hit piece on Dubya, looks
like to me. Who knows what was
distorted, omitted etc. while in
an effort to turn Reaganites sour
on Bush 43.

Look at who linked it...he was
hateful against Dubya & backers -
called me a liar, a Bush koolade
drinker, a RINO and destroyer of
Reagan!

Let me clue you in - my heroes in
the past were Goldwater, Reagan,
John Tower, Phil Gramm, D. Quayle
& Bill Buckley.

I want nothing to do with the type
of person or mindset involved in
my bad experience on this thread.

(Not meaning you, Mud..

[Mudboy Slim]

"Significant, too, the conservative Reagan didn't cut the WELFARE ST. (non-discretionary cradle-to-the- grave stuff) to less than when he took office. Still thought of as a conservative, though, while many hard righters were mad at him for not trying."

Any attempt by Reagan to cut the Welfare State with a Congress controlled by DemonRATS wouldda failed while resulting in a lotta bad publicity. To me, that's why we fought so hard to get Pubbies in control of Congress. Now that we've got GOP control of Congress, a valid argument can be made that significant change to the Right is a tough sell with Senate RINOs joining with the minority to stop any real significant gains by conservative Pubbies in the Senate; however, I'm looking for reasons to get the RightWing energized by talking about what we might expect with an even stronger GOP presence in the Senate for Dubyuh's second term. Ideologically, I sincerely believe government is best that governs least, and the devolvement of Power outta DeeCee will benefit all Americans...I just wish Dubyuh would get behind some of this sorta legislation to give evidence that he believes the same.

"A CATO hit piece on Dubya, looks like to me. Who knows what was distorted, omitted etc. while in an effort to turn Reaganites sour on Bush"

I don't really think CATO wants to turn Reaganites against Dubyuh as much as they'd like Bush to demonstrate the same sorta leadership in promoting liberty in America as he does overseas.

"Look at who linked it...he was hateful against Dubya & backers - called me a liar, a Bush koolade drinker, a RINO and destroyer of Reagan!"

So folks just never learned how to disagree without being disagreeable...thank you for keeping the discourse from eroding into ad hominem attacks.

FReegards...MUD

[Luis Gonzalez]

The America First Party, fully cognizant of the fact that they will never be in a position to actually try getting one single one of their items on their platform realized as Federal policy, can make all sorts of promises as if the opposition party did not exist, or as if they would simnply fold at the mere presence of an AFP member, and acquiesce to them.

Principles never tested are easily upheld.

Or...

It's easy to stay a virgin if you're living alone on a deserted island.

How are the policies destructive?

The answer is in your FReeper handle.

[txrangerette]

I know why Reagan did what he did.
But it wasn't "conservative" was
it? Yet few villify him as they
do Dubya, & he's actually a hero!

Dubya has reasons, too. In my book
he bordered on heroic for beating
Ann Richards. Now he's really on
his way to "hero" for tax cuts,
post 9-11 & coolness under fire.
So I will consider HIS reasons,
as well.

Luis mentioned that Dubya has so
TRIED to govern as he spoke in his
campaign('cept for nation building
which was changed by 9-11). True,
and he did the same in Texas.

Some(maybe you?) seem to think he
let them down, shocked them. Not
me...I expected about what I got.
Will say, though, the Campaign
Finance Law shocked ME! Its awful
content; that it passed, and it
bears his name!!!

I say he placated the POW-turned-
nut-job, McCAIN. No McCain, no
signature, I say. He has reasons.

Like'em or not.

[Isolationist]

I addressed a majority of your falsehoods and your response to my questions is to dismiss the AFP. And the best you can do on how some of the policies of the AFP I raised are destructive is to say “The answer is in your FReeper handle”.

You said it best because your lack of a decent rebuttal makes me say:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

But if you want to play the metaphor game:
Principles never tested are easily upheld –
How do you know if new principles are not better than the current ones if they are never tested?

It's easy to stay a virgin if you're living alone on a deserted island.
And it’s easy to stay a virgin in a busy city if you believe in your principles