Ahem - Jim Robinson himself, in a vanity post written in 1999, spoke about the dangers of a Bush presidency.
Get up-to-date. That was then, this is NOW.
Posted by Jim Robinson to John R. (Bob) Locke
On RLC Liberty Caucus 12/12/2003 12:58:47 AM PST #62 of 180
No, it's not ok. And I think most of the Republicans are fuming over this. It ain't over yet. Thank God that Gore did not get in. We'd still be negotiating with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Huesein if he did (if we hadn't already surrendered that is).
Course of action is to do all I possibly can to re-elect Bush and to build on the Republican majority. I have faith that a more conservative court will overturn this b/s first chance they get.
In the meantime, I suggest the best course of action is to start grooming a more conservative candidate for 2008.
AND:
Posted by Jim Robinson to John R. (Bob) Locke
On RLC Liberty Caucus 12/12/2003 12:48:44 AM PST #57 of 180
Of course not. I doubt they'll burn it down.
I have no idea how far I'm willing to go, but I do know that I'm willing to go for Bush and the Republicans next year. Like I said before, I think this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to turnover the courts. The very worst thing we could do is to turn it back to the Democrcats.
AND:
Posted by Jim Robinson to John R. (Bob) Locke
On RLC Liberty Caucus 12/11/2003 10:52:19 PM PST #35 of 180
I believe that during the campaign, Bush ill-advisedly promised to sign a campaign finance reform bill if delivered to his desk. Probably some kind of compromise with McCain. And who knows? Without that compromise, we may very well have had President Gore.
Again, it doesn't excuse a bad bill, but I don't think the ^conservative Republicans actually had majority control when this passed. In fact, I believe the Democrats had majority control of the senate at the time.
http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2002&rollnumber=34 In the House it passed 240 yea to 189 nay with 6 not voting (5 of those Republican). Almost all of the Democrats voted for it and very few Republicans. The vast majority of the Republicans (178) voted no, while only 11 Democrats voted against it. Only 41 Republicans voted for the bill, but a whopping 198 Democrats voted yes.
It passed the Senate 59 to 41. All but two of the Senate Democrats plus McCain and 11 rinos voted for the bill. Again, the vast majority of the Republican senators voted against it.
In sumamry, the vast majority of the Democrats along with the help of a relatively small minority of Rinos passed the bill.
Yes, President Bush should've vetoed it, and that was a major mistake as far as I'm concerned, but there is no mistaking the fact that this was a basically a DEMOCRAT passed bill.
The conclusion is not that we should abandon the Republicans, the most of whom did not support this fiasco, but we should boot the jackass Democrats, the majority of whom did.
And there's no way we should boot Bush. That'd only make matters much worse. We lose the presidency, we lose the majority and we'll lose big time to a liberal activist judiciary for the next 40 years. Do not make the mistake of turning the majority power back over to the Democrats. Enough already! Vote the rat bastards out!
AND: THERE'S MORE, a WHOLE LOT MORE. Have at it!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/site/user-posts?id=1;more=15962815 Actually if you support someone like Michael Peroutka you _are_ grooming a more conservative candidate for 2008.
"In the meantime, I suggest the best course of action is to start grooming a more conservative candidate for 2008."
Amen to what Jim said!
If we cheerfully and quietly accept what the republicans are doing then we cannot push/pull them back to the right.
Weekly there are articles in major news papers as well as leading conservative websites and even think tanks all reading the angst we are expressing about the growth in govt spending, etc.
Without our expressing this displeasure by the “un pleaseables” there would be no honest introspection.