Rush talked about all the work done by countless Conservatives over the past 5 decades to reach this point in our country's history only to have George Bush offer up a wet noodle SC candidate and how disappointing the choice is. I couldn't agree more. In return for believing and fighting for Conservative values, the base got a slap in the face for our loyalty.
I wasn't looking for a "poke-in-the-eye-of-the-Democrats" nominee, just one a lot closer to it.
Not doing so, Bush also errs greatly in other areas. His pick:
- fails to send a strong message to the Markets that trial lawyers will have a tougher time winning get-even, wealth redistribution lawsuits.
- fails to tell the country we're getting back to a representative government where who you send to Congress and the Constitution they shape matters.
- fails to tell the world community that 'We're Back!' A strong Conservative would've been worth a shot across the bow of all tyrannical despots, including the U.N.
- failed to send the message to liberals to 'Back Off!' A stonger nominee would've pushed them even further over the edge and even more clearly expose their un-American ways.
- failed to send the message that America is a Conservative country. A strong candidate would've made this country proud to be Americans again as did Ronald Reagan in the '80s.
Reviewing Bush's record I see this:
1. A proper response to Islamofacism (he had no other choice) although Rumsfeld is weak in its pussyfooting execution of it. The clincher for me was when the 21 soldiers from Ohio(?) were killed in an amphibious vehicle using grossly thin armor plated sides.
2. Open borders and the free-flow of
illegal immigrants. Also his coddling policy of same.
3. Runaway Spending and Growing Big Government. FDR would be proud, not Ronald Reagan.
4. Steel Quotas. At least he didn't raise taxes, eh?
Yep, one word comes to mind...
BETRAYAL
of the people who voted him into office.
1 posted on
10/04/2005 12:23:31 AM PDT by
rvoitier
To: rvoitier
2 posted on
10/04/2005 12:26:15 AM PDT by
KingKongCobra
(Trying to save the "Donner Party" from themselves.)
To: rvoitier
Soooooooooooooo does this mean we should slit our wrist now??
3 posted on
10/04/2005 12:27:15 AM PDT by
Mo1
To: rvoitier

Oh please. Miers is a pro-life, evangelical, mission-sponsoring Christian fundamentalist who chaired the committee that selected Judge Pryor from Alabama (**the** most right-wing Judge on the federal bench in America today), Judge Janice Rogers Brown from California, as well as Chief Justice Roberts.
The only thing betrayed by President Bush's SCOTUS pick would be the bias against him from fringers.
7 posted on
10/04/2005 12:29:40 AM PDT by
Southack
(Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: rvoitier
Hello rvoitier, I hope you don't mind me adding my bullet points to yours, though I think we're almost speaking the same truths here:
- Bush ran from the fight,
- he ran from his prior public announcements,
- he surrendered an entire decade in the future culture wars and burdened the cohort of Young Republicans with taking up the fight,
- he inexplicably wasted a 55 Senate seat majority, AND made it much harder for Republicans to maintain that majority, if the even deserve such political fortunes
- he has encouraged current Justices to remain on until his term ends
- he selected a woman because she's a woman,
- he nominated to the Supreme Court a lawyer who made him his fortune in the litigation and sale of the Texas Rangers, stinking of cronyism, giving a nod to the trial lawyers, and reinforcing his tacit support of the Kelso decision
- he gave Sen. Reid a stronger position in deciding his nomination than the public voices of his voter base,
- he denied his base the core promise he made to them,
- he has revealed he used switch and bait tactics mouthed through his media pontificators when the WH through them demanded us to suck it up and "compromise" during debates over RX plans, immigration reform, Campaign Finance Reform, the absence of a veto pen to stop the outrageous bloating of the Federal budget and Appropriations Bills, CAFTA, and others by using the promise of Supreme Court Justices as the payoff for all of the sacrifices,
- he used the payoff of a Conservative Constructionist Supreme Court as a bludgeon to stifle all dissenting debate within the party and the Republican/conservative/libertarian national debate, proving right those who were labeled too far to the right by our common political adversaries on the other side of the aisle
The WH just gave a huge phallic hand gesture to everyone to the political right of Arlen Specter.
On the other side, there are valid arguments too, including being a private industry lawyer, and a Beltway outsider. And she is a Texan. She was a senior partner in a lawfirm that is a rainmaker in Texas.
Dozens of jurists and lawyers with documented backgrounds who are a decade younger were passed over. Dozens, it's a very bad thought that there are hundreds of conservative lawyers and law professors in this country who could name more than a dozen better qualified and younger potential nominees than the one the WH has selected. As a young Republican who will one day see the battle to fill the seat Miers will vacate, I cringe at the idea of a Bush family crony positioning her way into the USSC through representing the President in the deal of his life through a dubious mess that was the Texas Rangers imminent domain and public funding sagas, at the expense of the grandchildren of today's conservatives who elected Bush to the WH twice.
To: rvoitier
Hold your arms, straight, outward, when you take that swan dive off the cliff.
15 posted on
10/04/2005 12:37:56 AM PDT by
BigSkyFreeper
("Don't Get Stuck On Stupid!" - Lieutenant General Russell "Ragin' Cajun" Honore)
To: rvoitier
Jesus, Mary and Joesph.
Just what we need... another damn vanity.

22 posted on
10/04/2005 12:44:42 AM PDT by
onyx
((Vicksburg, MS) North is a direction. South is a way of life.)
To: rvoitier
Who's the book burner adding KEYWORDS to my post?
got cajones?
24 posted on
10/04/2005 12:50:24 AM PDT by
rvoitier
To: rvoitier
Do you have any idea how these threads make Conservatives look like a bunch of crybabies.
"I didn't get exactly who I wanted.
Bush didn't clear the nomination with me.
Waaaaaaaah. I'll never vote Republican again!!!!"
41 posted on
10/04/2005 2:16:03 AM PDT by
MindBender26
(Having my own CAR-15 in RVN meant never having to say I was sorry......)
To: rvoitier
Well, this entire matter presents something of a quandary to the honest, balanced, and decent FR poster.
On the one hand, the hysteria of those, such as yourself, about a SCOTUS pick that is less than 24 hours current and regarding a nominee about whom we, as yet, know nothing other than that she is considered at least as conservative as the President who appointed her by those familiar with her personally, seems to me to be the worst kind of screeching overreaction.
But, on the other hand, I'm immediately suspicious of any threaded topic at FR which brings out the coordinated efforts of the smarmy Coven of Steel Magnolia wannabes, and their idiotic hangers-on/attack poodles in the ridiculous ranks of the silly "troll-hunting" brigades ("stuned beebers" and all similar such rank juvenalia).
When that crowd converges on the scene (with their "troll-hunting" court jesters not far behind), it's usually a sure sign that a "take one for the team" moment (i.e.: be "realistic" and just acquiesce to whatever concession to the Left is required) has arrived.
My take is that folks like you need to calm down, take a deep breath, and come to the realization that the sky is not falling. I have a feeling that your hysteria will ultimately prove to have been misplaced, and that this nominee will, in all likelihood, work out just fine to long term conservative expectations. At the very least, you, and others like you, could hold your flames long enough to decently allow facts we don't currently have to come out.
To be sure, when I peruse some of the replies from posters whom only slither out of their brackish, backwater cliques to go on the old "be reasonable" swarm attack (as well-evidenced in this thread), it naturally arches my, and any other decent person/genuine conservative at FR's, eyebrows.
But it is ridiculous to think that we shouldn't give President Bush, and his nominee, every benefit of the doubt, at least until we know a whole hell of a lot more. He's pretty much done right by the votes I cast for him in both 2004 and 2000, overall, by my estimation. How about you?
43 posted on
10/04/2005 2:26:48 AM PDT by
A Jovial Cad
("It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues." -Abraham Lincoln)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson