Should we trust George W. Bush?

World Net Daily ^ | 8/29/02 | Harry Browne

[feelin_poorly]

Shortly after 9-11, TV talk-show host Sean Hannity said, "Thank God, we have an honest man in the White House!"

And when you think about it, a great deal of what you might believe about the so-called War on Terrorism is based on statements from George W. Bush. You have only his word, or that of someone in his administration:

• that Iraq, which George Bush is dying to invade, still has "weapons of mass destruction" that threaten Americans directly;

• that Osama bin Laden masterminded the 9-11 attacks (the infamous videotape demonstrated his joy at the success of the attacks, not his participation);

• that the people being imprisoned as terrorists really are terrorists – even though they've received no public trial (whether you believe terrorists deserve to be protected by the Bill of Rights is irrelevant. You don't even know that they are terrorists until they receive a fair trial under the Bill of Rights);

• that the Bush administration won't misuse the private information it's acquiring through its massive violations of civil liberties.

Since America is endangered by the "you're either with me or against me" tactics of the Bush administration, it becomes vital to know whether we can trust the man in charge of our government.

The record

So does George Bush's record inspire confidence in his honesty?

Unfortunately, this is the same man who has referred to trillions of dollars in budget surpluses – even though the federal government hasn't had a budget surplus since 1956. (The appearance of any "surpluses" was created by taking excess receipts from Social Security and applying them to the general budget, even as the politicians swore they were protecting Social Security.)

Mr. Bush even has the chutzpah to refer with a straight face (well not exactly a straight face, he loves to smirk) to corporate executives "cooking the books." He neglects to mention that many of the corporate bookkeeping methods the politicians are so incensed about today were motivated by rules imposed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

And George Bush is the same man who in 2000 said he believed in "limited government." Most people assumed he meant a government limited by the Constitution. In fact, he took an oath in which he swore to uphold the Constitution.

But he's violated virtually every one of the first 10 Amendments – especially the Ninth and 10th Amendments, which are meant to impose precise limits on his power.

• He's willing to give your tax money to foreign dictators who claim they "need" it (meaning they've gone too deeply in debt by spending money on palaces and other forms of self-aggrandizement);

• He wants to escalate the spending of your tax money on farm subsidies, health care, welfare, government schools, the War on Drugs, propaganda and other programs – none of which are authorized in the Constitution;

• He believes we should trust him and his minions when they tell us the unnamed people they've locked up are not entitled to the protections of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

• He claims he can attack Iraq without a congressional declaration of war – even though the Constitution clearly gives such authority exclusively to Congress.

So his belief in "limited government" apparently means government limited to what he wants to do.

George Bush is the same man who in one breath tries to ingratiate himself with you by saying, "It's your money, not the politicians' money" – but in the next breath, he says he's entitled to one third of "your money."

George Bush is the same man who said he has learned more about political philosophy from Jesus of Nazareth than from anyone else. But he's proven by his actions that he doesn't really believe such things as "Blessed are the peacemakers." And "the meek" who Jesus said would inherit the earth are in Mr. Bush's eyes really just "collateral damage" in his plans to tell the world how it must live.

Is honesty important?

In these and in so many other ways, George Bush has proven that he's not an honest man – and that we shouldn't trust him with the safety of America.

In fact, Thomas Jefferson understood that we shouldn't put our trust in any politician. He said we should bind them down from mischief "by the chains of the Constitution." And a truly honest man wouldn't even ask you to trust him.

Contrary to what you might have thought, this isn't an article about George Bush. It's an article about you. Are you going to demean yourself by putting your faith in a man who has done so much to demonstrate the folly of such faith?

Are you going to let politicians stampede you into throwing away the Bill of Rights, based on "evidence" you never see, reassured by politicians who have proven that the truth is secondary to their own ambitions?

Don't you have enough respect for your own mind to make your own decisions, refuse to accept conclusions without evidence, and be something better than a cheerleader for a politician or a political party?

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

And just why do you think that is numbnuts?...you moron!...IDIOTS like yourself...you ninny.

If someone who uses language like this gets banned, it is strictly because of their politics. That's what I keep hearing, anyway.

[Mulder]

George W. Bush seems to be about as conservative as a politician can be at this time and still be elected.

That's what they want you to believe.

In the past 20 years, conservatives have had 4 landslides. Moderates have had zero. Liberals have had zero.

Only eight years ago, Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich (who was deemed "unelectable" by the elites) won a massive electoral victory. Veteran democrats were defeated, including committee chairman (deemed "unbeatable" by the pundits). Even the Speaker of the House went down in defeat.

Now what were the Republicans talking about back then? It wasn't "setting a new tone", or opening our borders , or setting up a police state. They spoke about the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence. They talked about abolishing 4 cabinet agencies. They spoke of implementing a flat tax or even abolishing the income tax altogether. They promised a massive devolution of power back to the people.

Yet, they still won. It was only when they abandonded those principles (i.e., folding to Clinton over the gov't shutdown and nominating Bob Dole) that they started losing.

Despite what the "experts" tell you, most of America, when presented the facts, is still pretty conservative. Of course, that's all changing thanks to the treasonous immigration policies of our "leaders".

[terilyn]

Your #103 - Very well said.

[lonestar]

Since you have resorted to name-calling, I will say that I think you are a flaming idiot!

If you think the people who attacked the WTC did it solely for the reasons you listed, you are a narrow-minded, myopic imbecile.

As for Switzerland, they aren't attacked because too many of the same people who attack the USA, have too much of their money invested in Swiss banks, you dimwit!

You see one piece of a puzzle, and think you have the whole picture.

You will never know more than you know today because you think you have all the answers.

You know not, that you know not!

[Lumberjack]

Yes, it does. And it alwasy seems to be the 1 percenters, or in Browne's case the .036 percenters

The one that's REALLY getting on my nerves lately is the one about how the people with BRAINS have all been banned!

Well, this can't be true. I'm still here. So that makes at least 3 that I can see (JeffersonAdams, KentuckyWoman, and myself). Of course, I post here so infrequently any more, its no wonder I haven't been banned yet. I'm sure if somebody caught whiff of my Jeffersonian ideals, it wouldn't be long.

You have yourself a good day now, mmmm kay? :)

[Mo1]

FOFL

[wimpycat]

Post a pic of a "winner", please...

Alan obviously can't, but I'd be happy to oblige you:

[lonestar]

More people have West Nile virus than voted for Harry Browne.

Are you thinking what I'm thinking?

[mrsmith]

"Harry Browne may be a idiot "
Well, this comment shows that you may have some knowledge of the Constitution.

Why don't you try joining some of the serious threads about Contitutional issues instead of trading snide insults on this thread dedicated to the proposition that people who don't think Bush is a liar are fools?

[SirAngus]

you ninny.

GASP, such language! lol

[Amelia]

Despite what the "experts" tell you, most of America, when presented the facts, is still pretty conservative. Of course, that's all changing thanks to the treasonous immigration policies of our "leaders".

Ok, then, explain to me why, in the 2000 GOP primaries, the front-runners were Bush and McCain, the LEAST conservative of the pack?

[lonestar]

Luv it!--

"numbnuts"

[Howlin]

And you wonder why more people don't support your candidate?

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

GASP, such language! lol

Well, "numbnuts" was the first one. "Moron" was the second. I guess they got a little milder as she pounded.

[Mo1]

I'm jealious .. LOL

[Lumberjack]

All politics aside, these are the feelings a man of his character conveys. He stands for us(all). I will stand for him 100%. If belief makes one a bot, than I proudly wear the title BUSH-BOT!

Puhhhleeez. The only feeling he conveys is "what? huh?". Bush has more power to keep his zipper up than Clintoon, no bout a doubt it. And that's about it. Government has expanded expotentially under his young Administration, not to mention that most of the expansion has nothing to do with, nor would ever prevent, terrorism. It boggles the mind how much statism his administration has implemented.

The only thing more stupifying is how people are rolling over for it.

And when a Demon-crat gets in office, you and those like you will be the first ones howling like stuck dogs about how "evil" government has become, conveniently overlooking all that you have done to facilitate its growth into Leviathan. Remember, you had a chance to stop this, and you chose instead the path of the Cult of Personality. When that day arrives, you'll have nobody to blame but yourselves.

[VaBthang4]

I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE ALL WHO OPPOSE OUR CURRENT GOVERNMENT TO PUT ACTIONS TO THEIR WORDS AND TAKE UP ARMS, STORM THE CAPITAL AND ENFORCE THE WILL OF THE CONSTITUTION IF YOU SINCERELY BELIEVE THAT IT IS NOT BEING DONE.

TO NOT DO SO IS COWARDICE AND WHOLLY UNAMERICAN.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

I EAGERLY AWAIT THE FOXNEWS REPORTING OF PATRIOTS TAKING BACK OUR HIGHJACKED NATION.

.....OR, MAYBE YOU'LL DO NOTHING.

;o)

[WhiteGuy]

Your remark gave me the inclination to ponder my answer....

"NO"

"He is a politician and a bush"

"Thats enough for me."

I've reconsidered this answer........

It's not only enough............

It's actually twice the amount required to draw this conclusion.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

WINNER:

Under 1%er