[jimkress]

Eschew Republican and Democrat tyranny. Support the US Constitution Party.

[Defender2]

If the United States were turned into a smoking hole, would you ALL be still crying over money!!!! It's WARTIME people and unless you know something different, history shows that spending tends to go up in WarTime!!!! You ALL can cry over spent money, I just want to defeat Our Beloved United States enemies, period!!!! And I don't care how much it costs either!!!! So I will continue to fight our enemies while you all continue to cry over money!!!!

[Capitalism2003]

This is not debatable. Bush and the GOP congress has left all true conservatives behind. Federal NON DEFENSE spending up 37% in three years. Clinton could only dream of this achievement.

[Burkeman1]

While much of the criticism of Bush is valid on foreign policy and domestic policy from a conservative point of view- reality is that no one is ever going to get everything or even a majority of what they want from any politician. Idealistic 18 years olds may vote for ideological purity but adults don't vote that way. I am one of the biggest critics of the Bush administration on this board from everything to the war in Iraq to his less than impressive support of conservative judicial nominees. But I am not about to give up the Federal government to a straighforward socialist who will appoint far left wing judges to the USSC. And I would rather have a foreign policy I disagree with run by people who at least are genrally moral.

Granted, if the GOP loses the Presidency- there will be little reason to vote for them in the future.

[Mr. Mojo]

George W. Bush is the boy who can’t say no.

The Prez has yet to veto a bill. ZERO. Reagan had already vetoed 20 bills by this time in his first term. "Compassionate conservativism" is a nice feel-good catch-phrase, but it's neither compassionate nor conservative.

[mercy]

I'm convinced all this spending is part of the plan. The big question is what will he do in his second term when thinking about his legacy.

Turning the economy around is required to assure his reelection. Massive government spending helps turn the heat up on the pot. I'm just hoping GWB does not want to go down in history as the president who broke the back of the terrorists but drove the country into bankruptcy at the same time.

IF he and we come out ahead in the war on terrorism over the next five years AND he tames government spending ... maybe even showing strong conservative tendencies (if not full and true responsibility) , it is highly likely that a third term for the GOP is possible in the WH. A rare thing indeed.

Will the GOP even remember the WORD conservative in five years?

[Edit35]

"Compare and contrast George W. Bush’s fiscal record with that of Bill Clinton. Total spending in Clinton’s first three years grew a total of 3.5 percent, and nondefense spending actually fell. Three major factors explain the discrepancy between presidents."

The projected 2005 deficit is actually less percentage wise than was the 1993 deficit under Clinton.

Furthermore, when growth in capital gains picks up, and it has already begun, the deficit gap will close PRONTO. Recall the years, 1998, 1999, and 2000 when the deficit went from 200-plus billion in the red to 200-plus billion in the black, all because of growth in (stock market) tax revenues.

President Bush is making the hard spending choices now with fighting terror and Medicare prescription, and hopefully he will allow the growing economy to close the deficit gap in 2005, 2006, and 2007 WITHOUT boosting spending even further.

To wrap it up, W's spending is not the end of the conservative world as some teeth-gnashers on this forum seem to imply.

[nmh]

Can you e-mail me privately on a link to the US Constitution Party. I'm sick and tired of RHINO's. I stopped donating to the Republicans along time ago. I should qualify that. The only Republican I gave money to was Bret Shundler who ran in NJ. He should have won but he received NO help financially or otherwise from the Republican party because he was too conservative and might scare people away. Besides they are more comfortable funding minority RHINO's.

[Action-America]

It's amazing that someone who has such a fine Foreign Policy should have such an abysmal Domestic Policy.

Based upon the iron grip on US politics, that the GOP and the Rats have legislatively assured themselves, I have always known that a third party would never have a chance in the US. However, Dubya may single-handedly change all of that. Up to now, he has been able to focus most attention away from his p1$$ poor Domestic Policy, by keeping attention on the war on terror, where he has performed very well. The question is, "How long can Dubya keep up such distractions?"

Once attention turns back to the domestic front, more and more Republicans will begin to realize that many of Dubya's Domestic Policies and initiatives are causing more harm than is made up for by his admirable Foreign Policy. They will realize that ALL true conservatives out there, would have just as good a Foreign Policy, without the excess baggage of an oppressive Domestic Policy. When enough Republicans wake up to that reality, the stage is set for a third party to emerge as a savior. The only problem then, is getting the various third parties to work together, which could be the death knell for any third party.

Even so, I cannot vote for Dubya. His supporters, blinded to his Domestic failures, by his Foreign successes, will point out that he is better than Dean, Kerry or any of the other Rats and that is a correct observation. But, such an observation intentionally fails to consider where you draw the line on what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior. All Republicans would readily admit that both Dean and Kerry are unacceptable. But, if asked who they would vote for, if those were the only two choices on the ballot, most of those Republicans would say that it doesn't matter which one is better and they would write-in a name, before casting a vote for either of those two, so unacceptable are they to Republicans. Well, that's the way I and many other Constitutional Republicans feel about Dubya.

Being better than the Devil is only a virtue if you are not also on the Devil's side. Most Constitutional Republicans don't ask that Dubya be a radical conservative. We know that would not be practical, as such a person would not be electable. All that we ask is that he just be anywhere to the right of center. Dubya has clearly crossed the line between Conservative and Liberal and is now acting like a Democrat, in all ways that count, except his Foreign Policy. He may be better than Dean and Kerry, but he is on their side. Slowly, more and more Republicans are realizing that being a good President means more than just having a good Foreign Policy. IF (and that's a big IF) public attention turns away from Dubya's Foreign Policy between now and the election, and Republicans begin to look seriously at his Domestic Agenda, he could be in real trouble, come November.

One can only hope.

 

[ETERNAL WARMING]

Support the US Constitution Party.

I already do, and the above article is just one of the reasons. I'm very disappointed in what has become of the Republican Party. The Conservatives there can be counted on the fingers of ONE hand.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

Truthful article, Jim. I see the attacks have already begun. :0) The sophmores here won't argue points, just the usual mindless Crips vs. Bloods thingy.

[The_Eaglet]

Eschew Republican and Democrat tyranny. Support the US Constitution Party.

Thanks for sharing many documented reasons to do so.