Replies

Yeah, we'll be MUCH better off with one of the 9 dwarves leading the nation, won't we? Then we won't have that LIBERAL GW espousing his anti-abortion views, or his anti-affirmative action policies, or his tax cuts, or his silly Christian values, or his war on terrorism, or any of his other LIBERAL policies. We'll have something much better, right? A total surrender to the democrat party. Wow, you guys are so smart, you're so far over my head in your strategy, that I can't even see how this is a good thing. Now, where did I leave those smart pills?

Anti-affirmative action? NOT! Bush supported SCOTUS' Univ. of Michigan decision that GRANTED racial quotas; his war on terrorism - you mean the one where he refused to identify the the true enemy - "islamic" terrorists; Christian values? Including the value that prompted him to praise a gay church (Metropolitan church); anti-abortion? Yes, he is anti-abortion. But I don't see any bold moves here to save lives or start a Constitutional Amendment against Abortion - the partial birth abortion bill was dead in the courts the day after it was signed and I don't see anyone fighting actively and vocally for the unborn in the Bush Administration - they seem to be too concerned about offending someone, and Ashcroft merely says he will enforce whatever law is on the books regardless of how bad that law is, and many of his court nominees are not all that conservative that I can see; Tax cuts were Good! - but, then Bush inexplicably signed the biggeset welfare bill in decades - big disconnect there. His policies on education are jmust more of the same big government type policies, and passage of the Patriot Act and CFR were constitutional atrocities!

Bush does what he can, when he can. I'm not going to argue in favor of his policies that I disagreed with, just in favor of his overall performance. For the most part, he caves in to congress routinely, but is still anti-affirmative action, at least for the most part. The Michigan case was not a total defeat, since it did reduce the level of affirmative action, even if it did uphold it partially. And you ought to know that Bush, or ANY president, isn't going to condemn an entire religion. What the hell are you thinking? Right or wrong, this ain't gonna happen. Ok, he praised a gay church. Should he have? No. But no president is going to stand outside a church with a "die fags, die" sign, so maybe he should just have ignored it. This doesn't make him pro-gay, it just makes him more tolerant than I am of anti-natural behavior. He has said on many occasions that he would veto a gay marriage bill, and supports the idea of a man and a woman defining a marriage, only. And yes, his court nominees, at least all of the ones that I read about, were conservative. So, you want a constitutional amendment against abortion? So do I. Now, just try making it happen. Bush isn't superman, and can't get the votes for it, and neither can anyone else. Remember how many votes it takes to get one passed? Now run those numbers with the pro vs anti-abortion numbers, and check your results. I too wish he'd use that veto pen, but he obviously lets congress pretty much have it their way. That's not a good enough reason to either impeach him, or to let President Clark and Vice President Clinton run the country. Also: I thought everyone knew that Marines weren't soldiers, but apparently this is a common misconception. Soldiers don't have those threads in their heads to screw the jar lid on. Or anyway, that's what my old Chief Petty Officer used to tell us when I was in the Navy.