Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An Open letter to Jim Robinson: Can the Bush-Bashers
none ^ | today | me

Posted on 06/06/2002 9:57:11 PM PDT by Big Guy and Rusty 99

Dear Mr. Robinson,

I have been a loyal member of the Free Republic since before the 2000 election. I have been a Conservative since the early days of Clinton. When I found this site, I thought "Thank God, people who think like me." I have continued to think this until the more recent days. Now, it seems that there are threads left and right bashing our President.

Why? There are things the President has done which I don't agree with but my loyality still lies with him. I am not sure if these "Bush-Bashers" fail to see the reality that with politics comes comprimise or it is something worse. I feel there is a cancer in the Free Republic. Some are eating their own.

I feel that some of these people are members of the dreaded democratic underground disguised as disgruntled conservatives. They are only here to stir up trouble. What's worse, they are doing just that. I am not sure what I think you should do.

As a conservative, I believe in our moral code but I also realize the reality of politics. I back our President but if he were doing something unsavory (like lying under oath,) I could not support him. This is unlike the left's clintonista dogma. What President Bush is doing is not betraying the conservative cause. He is using politics to confound the left. Those who do not understand this are either leftists themself or unable to separate themselves from their zealousness.

This is your show. You choose who gets to be a member and who does not. Those who break your rules are banished from the kingdom. I am not discouraging free speech, but this is free speech in your forum. These Bush-Bashers are brining us down. When this infighting happened in 1992, Bill Clinton got elected. let's not let that happen again.

Yours,

Big Guy and Rusty 99


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 721-740741-760761-780 ... 881-895 next last
To: rabbitdog
I don't agree with everything the President has done, but the President himself probably wishes the legislation sent to him was more conservative. The President is trying to do just as he stated, and that is to be a uniter, not a divider (not to mention he has a war to fight and needs all our help).

If your going to hold Bush to what he stated, such as his uniter pledge, why not hold him to other things he stated?

Many of us are simply asking for him to follow through with what he stated. There is nothing that precludes him from being a uniter as well as a Conservative. Nothing. Americans support Israel. Bush and Co. do not. Do you not remember Bush saying we stand beside anybody who fights terrorism? Then he turns around and practically stabs Israel in the back.

As for fighting a war, it's turning into Vietnam. We have Special Forces running around in caves looking for people who can blend right into the population. There is no end in sight. It's practically turning into a nation-building, and we are even wagining hearts and minds campaigns. Not exactly part of the Bush/Powell Doctrine. But I will reserve final judgement, for all I know, this Arab Yugoslavia may turn out okay and end up being a very staunch ally in the region, which we dearly need.

741 posted on 06/07/2002 9:36:14 AM PDT by texlok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 714 | View Replies]

To: Big Guy and Rusty 99
"bias against the President"? Get real; I voted for the man, have defended numerous times, trying to understand he is trying to please the entire country. Then, all of a sudden, it occurred to me, he seems to be pleasing more of those who didn't vote for him. He also appears as trying to load the Congress with moderates, which is what happened in our 3d District primary, backing the moderate without knowing anything about a decent Conservative, who is for lower taxes, smaller government.

Not a good answer, "bias against the government". And a terrible thread. You must know JimRob's personal feelings about Bush, better than I, since I don't recall him giving a public opinion on this. Who would you ask to remove *him*, if he makes a comment that doesn't agree with your opinion?

742 posted on 06/07/2002 9:37:11 AM PDT by katze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MississippiDeltaDawg
I know a lot of people wish he were more conservative, but I think he realizes that he's got a big ship to steer, and you can't turn that big of a ship on a dime. It's been swung the wrong direction for quite some time

"Eight years of Clinton crookery were preceeded by TWELVE years of Reagan/Bush -- just when does your "quite some time" start anyway? Clinton was obviously able to turn the big ship on a dime, so ...."

Been saying that for a while myself. Keep it up. That's one of MANY fall-back excuses used by those who Know they've been conned.

743 posted on 06/07/2002 9:38:28 AM PDT by rdavis84
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 728 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz; Jim Robinson; Admin Moderator; Bob J
"The place ain't what it was. Moderators will be the death of Free Republic."

Sorry Laz, I think you;re dead wrong on this one, the Moderator system could be the biggest boon ever for FR.

I propose a system where people can view deleted posts and threads, for a fee.

Call it a "Platinum Membership", or a "True Conservative Peep Show", and charge an additional fee, above and beyond the usual yearly donation for the service.

I'm not the only one that feels this way either.

Jim, you could double FR's cash flow with this idea, and who knows? Hello FreeRepublic TV!!!!

Give it some thought.

Luis

744 posted on 06/07/2002 9:38:33 AM PDT by Luis Gonzalez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 707 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
there seemed to be a liberaltarian purge awhile back. people complained but, as I have always asserted: This is Mr. Robinson's neighborhood, we just post in it.
745 posted on 06/07/2002 9:38:34 AM PDT by Big Guy and Rusty 99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 676 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
LOL!!!
746 posted on 06/07/2002 9:38:34 AM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 739 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Did they run MR. CONSERVATIVE in 1996 ?

No -- Dole claimed it was now "his turn" and as such, the GOP was doomed to lose to a corrupt fake. Perhaps if the party and the party faithful did a little less, "Well, he's better than a Democrat" and a little more encouraging true conservatives, people who do more than pay lip service to the agenda, then the agenda might actually make some headway.

Pitting Bush against Gore is making the wrong comparison -- we ought to be asking what's the difference between Bush and McCain. What is there any different than what we would have had with a McCain administration at this point?

747 posted on 06/07/2002 9:39:03 AM PDT by MozarkDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 455 | View Replies]

To: Big Guy and Rusty 99
Am I banned yet? Testing, testing...
748 posted on 06/07/2002 9:39:25 AM PDT by Liberal Classic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
We cannot know whether a poster is being sincere or not. Our own sense of rational logic does not apply to others, since all men may be created equal, but 20 years later there are some rather glaringly obvious differences :-).

What we can and do know for certain is that the slippery slope we must at all costs avoid is that of appointing or allowing a certain body within the whole to legislate who is being sincere and who is being facetious.

Once we, the Constitutional Conservatives, start off down that seductive path, we are on the road to Stalinistic tyranny, and we owe it to ourselves, our country, our brave dead and our unborn generations to select prudence over expediency.

A vacuous argument should be a good debator's most fervent wish answered, as it offers up sitting ducks for them to knock down with alacrity. Don't ever fear the "Bush Bashers."

Slam them with a grossly superior response, and we'll be just fine.

749 posted on 06/07/2002 9:39:41 AM PDT by Gargantua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 716 | View Replies]

To: Big Guy and Rusty 99
"There are things the President has done which I don't agree with but my loyality still lies with him."

For some of us "Bush-bashers," our political loyalty lies with the founders and the Constitution they gave us.

"I back our President but if he were doing something unsavory (like lying under oath,) I could not support him."

He swore an oath before God and the people of this nation that he would uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. He lied. By signing unconstitutional legislation he has not upheld the Constitution. By refusing to pursue the crimes of the Clinton administration he has failed to defend the Constitution.

"What President Bush is doing is not betraying the conservative cause. He is using politics to confound the left."

Says you. Bush is not betraying the conservative cause because the conservative cause has been defined down. So-called "conservatives" never stand their ground on principle. They go along with the "conservatives" in power so as to not rock the boat. If they had stood their ground when Bush signed Campaign Finance Reform, the Patriot Act, the Farm Bill or the $26 billion increase in education spending, they would have been branded as Bush-bashers by people like you. But good little conservatives are supposed to just go along with Bush because he's a brilliant political strategist trying to confound the left. Did you ever stop to think for one second that he might actually believe in some of the leftist things he has supported?

750 posted on 06/07/2002 9:40:06 AM PDT by sheltonmac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
LOL! Now THAT'S some quality satire!

Expect it to be deleted.

751 posted on 06/07/2002 9:41:41 AM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 744 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac
For some of us "Bush-bashers," our political loyalty lies with the founders and the Constitution they gave us.

Great post.

752 posted on 06/07/2002 9:41:52 AM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 750 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
Great screen name!
753 posted on 06/07/2002 9:43:32 AM PDT by sheltonmac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 752 | View Replies]

To: MississippiDeltaDawg
There was excitement that something would happen after the 1994 elections, but there was one problem. The President, like a smooth talking television evangelists was able to frame the Republicans as extremists and fool many into believing this and won reelection. Granted Bob Dole, who is a good man, and Newt, who let people down because of his own personal relationships, were not the best to press forward the conservative agenda. Also, Ross Perot caused some problems for Republicans. The Republicans became timid and started backing off. Remember also that Clinton even used the OKC bombings to try to scare people away from Republicans. He used Chinese money to help him get his phony message out and attacked with the black and white commercials of Dole and Newt. It is a continual fight that must take place to save our freedoms, and again I say that giving socialist like Waters, Frank, and McKinney a democratic presidents' ear is destructive for our country.
754 posted on 06/07/2002 9:43:44 AM PDT by rabbitdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 734 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Dang, I'm sorry I missed that thread. No cache, no nothing. Sign me up on your list too.
755 posted on 06/07/2002 9:44:00 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 693 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua
We cannot know whether a poster is being sincere or not.

There are many where it certainly is possible. Its just that those who are dispointed in Bush are not seeing them.

756 posted on 06/07/2002 9:44:54 AM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 749 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
That goes for people on BOTH sides of the fence.
757 posted on 06/07/2002 9:45:18 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

To: flamefront
...there would be no purpose at all for this forum if there were no dissent.

Also there is a big difference between disruption and dissent.


what a profound and true post flamefront
thank you
Love, Palo
758 posted on 06/07/2002 9:46:27 AM PDT by palo verde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 730 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
So that's what all this over-moderation is about--schemes to bring in more cash for FR (membership fees or advertising?). Go figure.
759 posted on 06/07/2002 9:46:29 AM PDT by eraser X
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 744 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Damn, that's one of the best proposals I've seen around here in a looooooong time. ;-)
760 posted on 06/07/2002 9:47:55 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 744 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 721-740741-760761-780 ... 881-895 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson