The Supreme Court is a problem. GW Bush has not had a single appointment there. The country is nearly evenly split in ideology and and he is not a tyrant. The conservative wing of the Republican party is strong but not dominant. Meanwhile the country is under attack from Islamic terrorists, envious Europeans, and traitorous Democrats and Socialists. You want me to boot GW Bush and the only party left with any patriotism at all ? Not going to happen.
These folks first allegiance, IMO, is to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. If that's not conservative, I'd like to know what is.
The Constitution and Bill of Rights do not serve in Congress, the White House, or the Supreme Court. They do not issue orders, write legislation, or render opinions. Power rests in the hands of leaders from one party or the other. There is no independent third way. There is either the Republicans or the PartyOfTraitors. You will get Bush or Dean/Hillary/Gore/Clark.
Since you decided to call them traitors and cowards,
Precisely identify and document your allegation.
it's about time you let everyone know what you think "conservative" means.
It does not mean let HillaryClinton run America again. It does mean fighting a war against the enemies seeking to blow up our cities. It means leaders like GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and John Ashcroft instead of Clinton/Gore/Cohen/Reno. Take your pick. Choose your side.
Yeah, Bush is a better bet than the socialist dems, who might be instant disaster, but it's hard not to feel disillusioned sometimes, especially after yesterday.
This is not about feelings. You lose a battle, you come back. Reagan made mistakes too. He was so much better than the the alternative Carter. So is Bush ! Help him be a better conservative president by supporting him, not abandoning him. He needs more conservatives in Congress. He needs to defeat Dean/Clinton/Clark. Not for his ego, not for show, but because the future of this country and the free world depend on it. This is not a game.
I hardly think so. Agreed that survival, and it is indeed at stake, takes precedence over freedom.
Yet, shredding our Constitution, that ain't a game either.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, I will try to answer it equally thoughtfully, when I get a moment to do so.
No. I'm voting for Bush as well. I'm horrified with CFR, which he signed, but he's still better than the Dems, who no longer even pretend not to be socialists.
"The Constitution and Bill of Rights do not serve in Congress, the White House, or the Supreme Court. They do not issue orders, write legislation, or render opinions. Power rests in the hands of leaders from one party or the other. There is no independent third way. There is either the Republicans or the PartyOfTraitors. You will get Bush or Dean/Hillary/Gore/Clark."
Our leaders are sworn to protect those documents that you seem so blithely able to disregard. Those documents are what this country is about. While I agree that we have to vote Republican, I cannot help but be appalled at what seems to be happening to our country, on a Republican watch.
"Precisely identify and document your allegation.
My apologies, my allegation is incorrect. Posts 21 and 46 came close, IMO, but did not actually label the other posters as traitors and cowards. My point here is that it is understandable that some here are disillusioned or betrayed enough to consider withholding their votes. Doesn't mean they are making the right decision, but also doesn't mean they are legitimate targets for such scorn.
You didn't actually answer my request for your definition of conservatism, rather you correctly implied that Hillary, Dean and the Democrats will destroy it. But I am going to assume it means for you as it does for me: allegiance to our founding documents and the ideal of individual freedom which they stand for. My reason for asking was the ferocity with which you argued against those who seemed most appalled by CFR. I have seen a few FReepers who don't really mind CFR.
I am hoping, as you are, for a Republican sweep next year, since I think it's our only hope. But I am starting to wonder what even Republicans stand for these days. My gut feeling still tells me that GW is a good guy who sees a big picture. But I'm not as sure of it as I was. Didn't his guys just praise the Court's decision on CFR? If so, that puts GW squarely in the camp with Ginsberg, Breyer, Bader, Souter and O'Connor, instead of in the camp with Scalia, Rhenquist, Kennedy and Thomas.