Posted on 07/19/2005 11:02:47 AM PDT by faithincowboys
If as it appears Bush will nominate a moderate named Edith Clement to the Court, will the Right bolt from the GOP in next years midterms? Bush, someone I have been a big fan of, is turning out to be a heck of a disappoinment. He hasn't controlled the borders and apparently only used the promise to appoint "strict constructionists" as a cynical ploy to get re-elected. Bush, like his father before him, is proving to be a huge demoralizer for the Right.
I'm not asking you to support the (potential) choice, I'm just asking you to hold fire until 1) the choice is made and 2) the candidate is thoroughly researched. If you still don't like the choice at that time, then by all means rant away.
The sky is always falling on FR. LOL
Actually, I had already answered them in #98, I saw no need to repeat myself. If you don't even bother to read my responses, you're probably quite correct in saying that it is pointless to continue responding to me.
Ping for hysterical, fact-free knee jerking.
I'll take
I assume
I suspect
So I have to talk on your timetable. The fact that the nominee is likely a female (I'm a female too, but..) I already see Bush's pick as a total cave to the punditry of Beltway talking heads. Now that it is likely a blank-slate-far-from-Scalia-and-Thomas Judge, I'm not exactly overjoyed with George.
No, I'm merely offering advice. If you want to look like an idiot by continuing to feverishly rant without any solid basis, you're perfectly free to do so.
Respond to post 125 please...
And apparently, I'm supposed to be jolly about getting f'ed over.
Let's see a show of hands for anybody on this forum that is surprised that you're one of the first to stab Bush in the back?
Anybody?
Somebody?
Come on....there's bound to be somebody????
***Crickets***
You asked me the same questions earlier, I answered them in #98. Since you're not reading my responses anyway, I see litle point putting forth the effort to repeat myself.
Has it ever occured to you that you might look like the idiot? Maybe you look like an unprincipled rube fighting to the death for a person who already cut his deal and arranged for a helicopter to land on the roof and fly him around on his post-Presidential speaking tour.
No.
Maybe you look like an unprincipled rube fighting to the death for a person who already cut his deal and arranged for a helicopter to land on the roof and fly him around on his post-Presidential speaking tour.
"Wait for the announcement, then do your research" = "fighting to the death"? Wow, I didn't know simple restraint was so dangerous.
Well, I'm not 100% sure that Edith Clement will be Bush's nominee. At about this hour of the day 8 months ago, many on FR were bemoaning exit polling that seemed to portend a landslide win for John Kerry. With all due respect to FReepers and those "people in the know," I'll await the President's 9 o'clock announcement.
I'm not very happy with Bush's actions or lack of actions on many issues. That's very different from saying we were all duped into voting for Bush. Bush was our best choice, and that's why I voted for him. Not because I thought he was the best possible choice, because he was the best of the choices I had available.
"Face it, we gave him, in the elections of 2004, all the help he needed to do what he said he'd do and he ain't doing it because he doesn't have the stomach and/or was never for us to begin with. Was it all hollow pandering?"
Ok, what did he say he'd do that he hasn't attempted to do. We gave him all the help he needed? Sure doesn't look that way in the Senate. For example while Bush won my home state of Ohio, our two RINO senators are a disgrace and keep working to undermine the president's efforts.
I agree that Bush isn't getting things done. I don't know why he isn't getting them done other than the Senate is unwilling to do anything. I don't think Bush is aggressive enough with the Senate and I think he should put Republican Senators on the spot for their actions and inactions.
However, the President doesn't enact law with the wave of his hand. Congress enacts laws, the President only gets the option of vetoing them or not.
On illegal immigration I'll have to say he was never with us, and downplayed that aspect rather than fact the heat from his republican base. I don't believe he really promised something other than he's worked towards, I just think he's wrong.
Who knows who it's going to be? I think this is a mad attempt to get conservatives to oppose Bush. BTW, I will be very upset if he appoints Arlen Specter or somebody of that ilk, but otherwise, I'll wait and see. He's given a number of hints that it may not be a sitting jurist, so we shall see.
Isn't it, at some point, Bush's job to corral the GOPers in the Senate, argue his policies to the American people and effectively combat the liberal media? He isn't doing enough if all he's doing is riding his bike waiting to wreck. He has the numbers in the Senate and the House and he has the damn Presidency, why doesn't he act like it?
Of course you mean NOT MUCH faith in cowbodys, right?
LOL!
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.