If not Bush, then who?

12-28-2003 | agitate

[Agitate]

I've noticed several threads where people say they will not vote for Bush if he supports certain causes. Some include:

Memogate:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1045476/posts

Broad Amnesty in immigration:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1046165/posts

(Please don't see this as an attack on those threads or any comments in them, it's not.)

While I agree with the conservative position on both of these threads, I don't understand how a person could not vote for Bush even if he does some things that are inexplicable from a conservative point of view.

My belief is nothing could be worse than a democrat in office in 2004. I know that is the lesser of two evils vote, but it is true.

Even if Bush gave amnesty to immigrants to pander to hispanics, which would be disgusting, is that reason enough to allow a democrat a greater chance to get in office? Wouldn't the dems likely do worse?

[inquest]

I've been beat up in this forum for suggesting that the SCOTUS does not lead anyone in any particular way, but simply acknowledges the direction we've already taken as a society.

I see, so they were just caving into popular demand when they decided to begin imposing foreign law on us.

[gatorbait]

Nothing changed.Tator's point was that yes, we have Rush, et al, and we have FR and other good sites. The squishy middle does not listen to Rush nor do they bother to read the sites.
I stated earlier, sometimes a what appears to be a setback is actually a resounding victory.Think Battle of the Coral Sea.So it is with some of W's apparent lefty tilts.

[gatorbait]

I'd be happy if the Democrats adopted the platform of the Constitution Party.


To dream the impossible dream...... Don Quixote one of your heroes?

[MissAmericanPie]

Thank you kind Sir. (striking a pose)

[MissAmericanPie]

Excellent solvo.

[inquest]

I know it's impossible. I was responding to nopardons's idiotic remark that because the Democrats adopted the Bull Moose platform, the Bull Moosers were failures.

[nopardons]

Look, when you make such an outlandish statement, such as you don't care WHICH of the major political parties picks up YOUR ball and runs with it, on a Conservative forum, and then claim that 1)I didn't refute you 2)correct you 3)made irrelevant point, etc. it's way past time that you get someone to read and explain the threads and posts to you.

And as far as " logic " goes...go but some;you haven't a shred of any.

[woodyinscc]

I'd be happy if the Democrats adopted the platform of the Constitution Party.

[dcwusmc]

hey, Kevin, you're getting there. Another post I can totally relate to. Thanks!

[gatorbait]

the Bull Moosers were failures

In the end, they did fail.That particular election led to the election of Woodrow Wilson, whom I have come to regard as one one the 5 worst Presidents ever.
I believe firmly that the Bull moosers truly believed in their cause , right into March ,1913.I also believe that,thought certain of their platform was enacted ,or at least given lip service, in the main, they remain a failed party.

[gatorbait]

the pleasure is mine, ma'am (taking a bow :-) )

[potlatch]

I agree with you, Agitate. I also believe that in a second term, Bush will be 'freer' to do some of the things that we would like to see done.

[nopardons]

You're welcome. LOL

No,it REALLY wasn't worth it, but I figured, oh what the hey. :-)

[inquest]

There's nothing outlandish about not caring about the name of the party that adopts my platform. It's what's inside the bottle that counts, not the label on the outside. If you can't see that, you're simply hopeless.

[inquest]

Which unpardonablyobtuse interpreted to mean that I thought it was likely that they would. Choose well the company you hang out with.

[nopardons]

But they WERE! Teddy was a GOPer first, he split the GOP vote and a Dem became president,all because of his ego.

And if you < B> RFEALLY wsant to read " idiotic " posts...read your own.;^)

[inquest]

That's all well and good, but what I was referring to was their agenda. They managed to get their agenda implemented by dangling it in front of the major parties. As third parties have historically been able to do once they acquire sufficient momentum.

[inquest]

So you're into bait-and-switch too. Understandable. You need all the help you can get.

[nopardons]

Oh, I see, snake oil And treason is fine and dandy, just as long as you imagine that you're getting 100% of what you think you want. Okay, I see it all clearly now. You'd vote for the candidates run by the American Communist Party, if and when they said that they were would take the CP's platform.

You see, you'd have NO guarantee at all, none, but you'd gladly buy, as whole cloth, whatever some party hands you, just as long as you imagine you'll be getting what you want.Names are meaningless, past history is meaningless,and if you don't get 100% of what you want RIGHT NOW, you're gonna stamp your feet, take your ball and go home to pout and sulk.

[dcwusmc]

Check out THIS thread. One more nail in the coffin of a second term for Bush:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1047908/posts