Posted on 10/11/2014 6:30:44 AM PDT by Din Maker
So what? The Bush years were heavenly compared to what's happened in the past six years.
Bush and the Republicans didn't pass through Obamacare. Bush cut taxes. Bush protected the nation from Islamic terrorists. He put far more conservative judges on the courts. Bush didn't open the floodgates to tens of thousands of illegals. He didn't corrupt the IRS. His Justice Department didn't pander to Al Sharpton,
Yes, we should strive for the most conservative candidates we can get in the primaries. But, only a fool doesn't believe that we're better off with Republicans, even establishment ones, in charge than Democrats. The last six years has proved that conclusively.
There have been STUPID things done on both sides. Yes, there were dirty tricks used to defeat McDaniel. But, morons decided to nominate Todd Akin, Richard Murdock and Christine O'Donnell, three embarrassing candidates that helped allow Democrats to remain in control of the Senate.
It's beyond belief that you even have to ask the question.
There is certainly is huge difference between all Republicans and all Democrats on Obamacare. Because all Republicans voted against and all or most Democrats voted for it.
The difference combating Islamic terrorism and defending the nation from it couldn't be greater than between Obama and Bush.
The difference between Elena Kagan and Samuel Alito couldn't be greater.No, they weren't — Take a look at the history of Romney for some of the more egregious ones.
He would have nominated more conservative ones as President because he would have been elected by a more conservative base. Any judges he would have appointed would have been far more conservative than ones Obama did.
You're making points that are even remotely true. The last six years has proven there is huge difference between Republicans and Democrats.
Voting for the greater of two evils is going to give us communism. Everything from the gun rights and to religious freedom are going to be gone if liberals continue to pack the courts with far left judges.
Voting for the lesser of two evils is called self-preservation. Lying is evil but lying is acceptable if it protects innocent people from harm. The same logic applies to voting for less-than-righteous Republicans over Democrats.
No Bush simply made us all terrorist suspects. TSA, DHS, Patriot Act, to name a few of the new agencies and powers that were handed down to Obama. That's what you couldn't get through to a BushBots head he wasn't going to be POTUS forever and like Nixon and the EPA it's hard to stop agency abuses once the agency is established.
Now How much did Bush really do for our troops and military? What was the End Troop Strength Increase following 9/11 meaning allowed numbers of active duty and reservist in the military? It was ZERO. Want more? Here's one. In 2000 our Navy has 318 ships. In 2007 we had 277 a low unseen in U.S. History since before WW1. I'm not making it up I look things up and this was taken from a .mil website. Who prospered defense wise? Defense Contractors were the ones who got help.
What about our troops in Iraq? remember the accusations, imprisonments, and Court Martial of our troops there on the word of Iraqis? Remember his bringing terrorist to GITMO and not allowing a military Tribunal? Remember that? How did that work out for us?
Bush was not a Conservative. He had no use for Conservatives and IF people had listened to him early on in the 2000 primaries instead of acting like hormonal love sick teens they would have known that.
Who was it that opened us to Mexico? You forget he tried his everloving best to make us the North American Union. Illegals drive rigs on our highways thanks to Bush. Remember our BP agents being jailed? Would you work in an environment where you could not defend yourself when attacked? Do you Remember that? The Border is a war zone and Bush bares some fault because he lacked the will to do anything as well. His trade policies meant more. Do you remember enforcing our borders by citizens being discouraged?
Most of what has happened in the past six years was made possible by precedents set in place by Bush and approved by both houses including domestic government ran databases on law abiding citizens activities.
Bush was so consumed with Trade {remember where dear old uncle Prescott was when the P-3 was forced down?} W even used the war on terror to try and ram through his trade policies using the W.O.T. as an excuse.
The Bush Legacy is this. The wasted six years of a two house and While House GOP Majority where the damages done to our nation went untouched. Why? Because he and the S.O.H. and SML's were running Liberal Agendas. Ted Kennedy got a lot of things done under W that he couldn't have done even under Clinton because at one time the GOP had a spine. What Party Wrote Medicare Part D? When was it passed? As for judges? Something tells me we will be regretting The Roberts Court for decades to come.
Great Jumping Jeffords you forgot something. LOL. The GOP unnecessarily surrendering partial control of the senate. At 50/50 the GOP by default still would have had the senate due to GOP VP. Jeffords should always be a reminder as to what damage even one Liberal in the party can do.
Jeffords should always be a reminder as to what damage even one Liberal in the party can do.
Why?
Seriously, what would republican control of the senate gain us?
How many House bills has Dingy Harry stalled out when they go to the Senate? Nearly all of them. Some of them not very good, admittedly, but do you really want this rules mechanic in power any longer?
It’s an unpopular “do nothing” Congress, due to “Republican intransigence” and that is entirely down to Dingy Harry and the water carriers in the media. No one else. If you can’t see the benefit of getting rid of him and forcing the Worm to veto needed legislation personally, instead of being protected from having to stick his head out of his cozy little bubble, I despair of you.
You fight with the troops you have, not the troops you wish you had.
He and I have made a few comments about not supporting Cochran, and even the possibility of voting for the Dem instead of just not voting Cochran. The same folks who gladly gave Obama a second term because they wouldn’t vote Romney are calling the names - typical FR crap where some “have principles” that change according to their current whims and they need to berate those who actually spell out a quandary (while these same ones will “explain themselves and their plans with clarifying statements like, “no way, no how”).
This, from a guy who actually owes his position as Speaker to the fact that the Tea Party won the House for Republicans in 2010.
He may be a friend of yours, but he's no friend of mine.
The problem with Roberts is he’s a huge player of the cloture/deception gang.
Many, many of those ratings don’t take cloture in to account.
Who said anything about voting for the greater of two evils?
Certainly not me because I reject the faulty underlying assertion that there are only two parties; just because I choose to vote Constitution party, or Libertarian, or any other 3rd party does not mean I'm voting for the other party
precisely because there is not other party
.
Everything from the gun rights and to religious freedom are going to be gone if liberals continue to pack the courts with far left judges.
And how is that going to stop if the liberals elected are elected because they have an R next to their name?
Voting for the lesser of two evils is called self-preservation.
No, it's called tacit approval and collusion.
Lying is evil but lying is acceptable if it protects innocent people from harm. The same logic applies to voting for less-than-righteous Republicans over Democrats.
If lying is evil, why was Rahab the Harlot mentioned in Hebrews as commendable?
That you consider statists willing to twist logic into nothingness to get the Constsitution to say what they want as "conservative" at all is quite telling.
Here's Alito admitting the 4th exists, and implicitly that warrants are required for searches, only to be shat upon a few paragraphs later:
The Fourth Amendment provides:Get that?“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”The text of the Amendment thus expressly imposes two requirements. First, all searches and seizures must be reasonable. Second, a warrant may not be issued unless probable cause is properly established and the scope of the authorized search is set out with particularity.[…]we have often said, “‘that searches and seizures inside a home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable.’”[…]
But we have also recognized that this presumption may be overcome in some circumstances because “[t]he ultimate touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is ‘reasonableness.’[…]Accordingly, the warrant requirement is subject to certain reasonable exceptions.
seizures inside a home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonablebut this unqualified requirement is subject to certain reasonable exceptions.
He's talking out of both sides of his mouth to justify the unjustifiable!
Just like Schenck declaring that despite the 1st amendment's unqualified prohibition on congress making a law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press
they certainly could during wartime.
And you're talking about how conservative he is? Ridiculous!
Where the heck are you getting that number?
The GOP's party planks? The things they say to get elected?
The GOP's actions prove that they have absolutely no intention, on the national level, of holding to even one of those planks.
There's a word for people like you: sucker
.
Someone who wants to “punch us in the nose” is not our friend.
A Republican who does not want to close the border, support traditional marriage, repeal ObamaCare, reduce spending and taxes are not our allies.
Check this out Maceman; it’s a shocker! Karl Rove and Joe Trippi predict that Roberts (KS) and McConnell (KY) will both lose, but the GOP will win control of the Senate.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3214391/posts
Interesting rant. None of that has any bearing on my comment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.