Problems that I am having with this president

[MontePierce]

Most of you don't know me because I'm a lurker and have never really posted here. I am a life long Republican and have never voted for a Democrat for ANY office. I consider myself extremely conservative. Yet, at the moment I am having some serious issues with our president. I don't know exactly where to start so I'll just create a list.

1) No Child Left Behind - Besides the fact that this program was created by Ted Kennedy, my main issue is that it makes the federal government responsible for fixing schools. State and local governments are supposed to be running schools, not the federal government. What we're left with is people blaming the president when their schools are bad instead of the state and local officials who can actually do something about it but don't have to because they don't take the blame for it.

2) Department of Homeland Security - I realize that there is need to fight terror on the homefront and keep ourselves safe. But adding another cabinet department is just more bureaucracy that just isn't needed. We could have just as easily created another agency under the defense department to help law enforcement work with the federal government to fight terror. Creating a new cabinet department is something I'd expect from somebody like Clinton, not somebody like Bush.

3) Iraq war - I supported our president going into Iraq and I still do support the war effort. But what I've seen with Iraq so far is a large amount of mismanagement and that seriously concerns me. The defense department should have not "assumed" that the Iraqis would welcome us with open arms and should have been better prepared for the attacks that our troops face right now. And as the whole WMD's thing goes, I don't buy the argument that the President lied about them. However, the fact that George Tenet gave the president faulty intelligence is no excuse. Bush should've fired the guy's ass the day he took office, or at least after the intelligence failure's that led up to 9/11.

4) Not standing up the democrats in the senate - We control the white house and both houses of congress and yet this president has still let the democrats take advantage of us in the senate. He didn't stand up for Trent Lott after the whole incident at Strom's brthday party resulting in a good experienced leader resigning and being replaced with an inexperienced Frist. Frist has allowed the tax cut to be reduced to 350 billion and has yet to give the democrats any real challenge to their fillibusters on judicial nominees besides that joke of a 30 hour debate-a-thon.

5) Spending - This is what gets me the most. This president has spent an outrageous amount of money so far and driven up the defecits when in his first state of the union he said that he would cut spening and use the extra money for tax cuts and to pay off the national debt.

6) Outsourcing - I don't like this whole idea of a global economy. Making and selling goods in America has worked fine for many years, why do we need to change that?

So here I am in a bit of a bind. I will NOT vote for a democratic president because I refuse to put another Bill Clinton tax and spend liberal in the white house. Yet I've seen this president making stupid mistakes like Clinton did and spending money like Clinton tried to but congress wouldn't let him. I'm seriously considering staying home on election day.

[edeal]

So how does this differ from the Libertarians? It seems that if the people flocking to third parties would flock to the SAME third party, the process would be more efficient.

Unless Bush does something before the election to affirm the next term will not be a "dismal failure", I will not be voting for him. That mean he has a chance to keep it. Just stop acting like a democrat on steroids.

The thing that keeps me the most loyal is the Supreme Court. However, seeing two of the appointees Bush's father appointed (Souter and Kennedy) to the bench and the inability to fight the Dems in the Senate does not get my hopes up.

Personally I think S D OConnor has become a liberal in her old age, and may be waiting for a Dem before she retires anyway. Why can't we have 9 Scalia's instead of just the 2? (This is a jab at Thomas, who 99 percent of the time puts "ditto" after Scalias comments).

[jkrouskop]

Conservatives should oppose an education system that is completely at the mercy of rampant liberalism. You may feel that completely removing any federal influence from education will lead to a better system, but I'm not prepared to completely hand the future of the nation over to those who will not even allow the Pledge of Allegiance because it mentions God. No Child Left Behind is far from perfect, but it forces the Democrats to look elsewhere when seeking election year issues, and it reminds them that conservatives DO care about what is being taught to their children. Be realistic.

Please review the entire legislative record during the first three years of the Bush administration before you throw that Patriot Act paranoid nonsense at me. Many of those bills you claim Bush signed after Democrats put them on his desk were actually sponsored by Republicans and pushed by the administration. Your civil rights have never once been violated by the Patriot Act, and neither have mine. Most of the new and more controversial aspects of that law still require a court order to enact, and that requires sufficient cause to suspect an individual may be a terrorist or terrorist-backer. There is certainly room for abuse, but this administration is not abusing the Patriot Act. Only those who have ties to terrorists need fear the Bush administration.

Have you ever served in the military? Do you have any idea the risks involved in being deployed in the Middle East? Because the terrorists have proven more resourceful and more determined than you, the uninformed civilian, expected does not mean that the military and intelligence authorities running the show are "mismanaging" it. The war proper was won in 22 days, and US military forces are there to ensure that a future war to oust another maniacal dictator will not be necessary. The brutality of war does not diminish the valor of those who fight or the nobility of the cause they fight for. Why don't you write to the troops in Iraq and tell THEM how their efforts are disorganized and mismanaged? I'm sure they'll appreciate that. As for Bush Sr.'s comment, "fruitless" hardly describes this war, since that dictator is behind bars and the "unwinnable war" is hardly unwinnable. If you honestly believe we're only still in Iraq to find WMDs and save face, and not to try and keep peace until a new government is in place, then you are beyond reasoning with. Further, if you really believe there is NO possibility that Saddam may have hidden or destroyed any evidence of WMDs then you know NOTHING about the man we removed from power. Be against the war if you so choose, but don't be naive.

Not voting for Bush will put the very liberal, very self-serving John Kerry in the White House. If you don't see the harm in that, you are nowhere near as conservative as you claim. That's okay, though. Go ahead and betray your country by handing it over to another Clintonite liberal. I'm sure the military men who die because they are not supported properly by their new commander-in-chief and his administration, the unborn babies who are aborted, the taxpayers who see their tax burden go back to Clinton era levels, the Christians who are refused the right to express their religious beliefs in public and every other American who suffers from Kerry's policies will all forgive you for your failure to do your civic duty and vote in the Presidential election.

It's your country, too. How can you stand idly by and let a liberal take it, simply because the Republican in office is not as conservative as you would like?

[GraniteStateConservative]

6) Outsourcing - I don't like this whole idea of a global economy. Making and selling goods in America has worked fine for many years, why do we need to change that?

That's a false choice. We can trade with other countries and we should as long as we are on equal footing. But, we aren't citizens of the world, yes. There are FReepers here who are fine with being citizens of the world, but some of us aren't. Many conservatives oppose entangling foreign alliances or any alliance or participation in any treaty or agreement that compromises our independence as a nation and the withdrawal of the US from the IMF, the World Bank, WTO, NAFTA, GATT, etc. Many of us oppose trade policies that weaken American families. You need true economic security for true national security and true national security for true sovereignty.

[GraniteStateConservative]

5) Spending - This is what gets me the most. This president has spent an outrageous amount of money so far and driven up the defecits when in his first state of the union he said that he would cut spening and use the extra money for tax cuts and to pay off the national debt.

He tried to buy the votes of Iowa and South Dakota voters and we got both Senate Dems re-elected. In fact, in SD, he suddenly got fiscally responsible in opposing drought relief and that albatross cost Thune the election. I'd have thought that once you commit to buying votes with taxpayer dollars, you go full bore.

[GraniteStateConservative]

3) Iraq war - I supported our president going into Iraq and I still do support the war effort. But what I've seen with Iraq so far is a large amount of mismanagement and that seriously concerns me. The defense department should have not "assumed" that the Iraqis would welcome us with open arms and should have been better prepared for the attacks that our troops face right now. And as the whole WMD's thing goes, I don't buy the argument that the President lied about them. However, the fact that George Tenet gave the president faulty intelligence is no excuse. Bush should've fired the guy's ass the day he took office, or at least after the intelligence failure's that led up to 9/11.

You can't fire Tenet. Everyone is in the same boat on WMD. Firing Tenet would just poke another hole in the boat, and wouldn't help Bush politically.

[GraniteStateConservative]

2) Department of Homeland Security - I realize that there is need to fight terror on the homefront and keep ourselves safe. But adding another cabinet department is just more bureaucracy that just isn't needed. We could have just as easily created another agency under the defense department to help law enforcement work with the federal government to fight terror. Creating a new cabinet department is something I'd expect from somebody like Clinton, not somebody like Bush.

Well, Reagan created a new Administrative agency and then made it into a Cabinet department for good bureaucratic measure, so no one's perfect, I guess. It wasn't really necessary to do this, you're right. The problem was the way these places operated. You change those by changing who runs these places and you trim out the worthless personnel. The problem is that government employees are protected from normal workplace events like firings for incompetence. And even after all of this, the borders are still open wide. Don't you feel safer, now?

[GraniteStateConservative]

4) Not standing up the democrats in the senate - We control the white house and both houses of congress and yet this president has still let the democrats take advantage of us in the senate. He didn't stand up for Trent Lott after the whole incident at Strom's brthday party resulting in a good experienced leader resigning and being replaced with an inexperienced Frist. Frist has allowed the tax cut to be reduced to 350 billion and has yet to give the democrats any real challenge to their fillibusters on judicial nominees besides that joke of a 30 hour debate-a-thon.

Don't blame Frist for the "tax cut" cut. Bush caved to Voinovich and Snowe. He didn't seal the deal. He's the head salesman. Same with filibusters. They all take cues from Bush and Bush has the job of leading the party, including the senators. He didn't persuade them to go marathon-style, and it's debatable whether he even wanted that.

[GraniteStateConservative]

What state do you live in? If it's a safe Bush state, vote for some third party candidate that best represents your views.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Actually, even if you aren't in a safe Bush state, presidential re-elections don't come down to margins of 500 votes like Florida in 2000 or 300 votes in NM, so vote for whomever you want.

[GraniteStateConservative]

We're all grown-ups here. If you communicate civilly, you shouldn't be banned. We're not all mind-numbed robots. Welcome to FR.

[GraniteStateConservative]

I'm a lifelong liberal Democrat who has never voted for a Republican, but this year I'll be casting my vote proudly for President George W. Bush.

Who did you vote for in 2000, then, Coop?

[GraniteStateConservative]

A choice, not an echo, for sure.

[Coop]

This is what finally gets a reply out of you?

[GraniteStateConservative]

I've replied to you before.

[Sloth]

4)...yet this president has still let the democrats take advantage of us in the senate. He didn't stand up for Trent Lott after the whole incident at Strom's brthday party resulting in a good experienced leader resigning and being replaced with an inexperienced Frist.

When did Trent Lott ever stand up to the Senate Demonrats? He deserves at least as much criticism for spinelessness as the President.

[beachn4fun]

Hey FRgal4u....doesn't this look like a job for the kitties? they signed on 2/19/04.

[beachn4fun]

You know a lot of people are having trouble agreeing with everything the President is doing or has to do. But overall I think his job as President has been outstanding. I like his backbone.

No, I don't like his spending, but I remind myself that he has to spend money to build back our defense that was cut so badly when Clinton & Gore came into power. We were hit by the worst attack on our country in years! We have to fight a different war. That means new technology. That is not cheap! Unless you can convince the developers to hand it over to our government and military rather cheaply. Helping the Afghans & Iraqis does not come cheap, either. Oh, don't forget all the natural disasters that the US has suffered in the last four years. So, yeah, these kind of things cost money.

And, besides, for me there is no one else out there I'd even consider voting for. AND.....if I don't vote....a Democrat just might win, and that would be FAR WORSE!

[Paleo Conservative]

MontePierce
Since Feb 26, 2003

A year is quite a while wait to be a troll.

[BoneHead]

And many of the respondents have been recent additions too.

[jstolarczyk]

Sorry for the late response. The problem with entitlements is that the majority of people now truly believe they are RIGHTS, not entitlements. I do not believe in nor do I want more. No President, this one or the next, will ever stop them, it is political suicide! The real bad guys in the entitlement fiasco is the Congress, in the separation of powers they are suppose to act as a check and balance to the white house, instead they act as a checkbook. Get rid of lifetime politicians and things may change.