Posted on 01/13/2004 1:38:02 PM PST by quidnunc
You hear it in the coffee shops all over the "red areas" of the map. Everyone knows that is where the real politics is discussed in America. Conservatives are asking themselves, "What was the President thinking?" They might be talking about No Child Left Behind, or steel tariffs or the signing of many less than conservative bills.
In the coffee shops in the "blue areas," liberals don't sit around much. They are too angry and busy to stop for a while but many are thinking that President Bush is the most conservative president in years, since "oh, my God, Reagan," and he must be stopped.
Both of these assessments cannot be true and after spending years looking at politics, I took my first serious stand on a candidate in 1968 at the tender age of 9, if both sides are mad at you, you are probably on the right track. So why should conservatives and moderates support the President, now on issues and later this year at the ballot box?
-snip-
Based on the history of this President, we better not count him out till we see how things unfold. He is what conservatives asked for in a President. He cut taxes, got our economy going again and lives and breathes the safety of this country and the people in it. When it is all said and done, George W. Bush does what he believes is right for the American people and he is willing to stand on his record in November.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
But flauting your previous place of citizenship/residence and using the derogatory term toward our President won't endear you to many around here, imo. It for sure won't help you win them over to the LP side of things..
Whore-Hay Bush
Why do you have to use that term to address our President as you have in some of your post?
I see. So "real" Americans support the fact that we spend US taxpayer money to carry the water for the Saudi Royal family. In fact, it's impossible for a "real" American (you know, one that was born here, not one of those dirty immigrants) to have a problem with the war in Iraq. If that is so then most of the Dems I know must be Canadian infiltrators.
As for US drug laws, what's your feeling of the US constitution? I tell you what, you find some place in the US constitution that provides the feds the power to regulate drugs and I'll fell soooo much better about them that I will send Bush a thank you note for being so good about enforcing them.
Not without the consent of Congress. I don't doubt but that the Republicrats will be tempted to dance, either. But I think change will come most radically if we reject those who betray the principles of limited govt. If we reward Bush for this betrayal, they have no reason to change. When you look at the history of the RP, there are very few bright spots. Goldwater, Reagan (somewhat), maybe Ike. There are lots of disasters.
Four letter words or personal attacks do not make you appear intelligent either. (food for thought)
Trust me, I was being polite. I try to avoid littering. Canada after all is not all bad.
OK so you support the Canadian government's views on US drug laws. So far you are batting zero in your cure. Maybe it would be easier to let you say what you disagree with Canadian government on.
Yeah, I am really wondering why you left.
I agree we need more senators on our side (especially to confirm judicial nominees). That's where our focus should be. More reps, too.
If you think President Bush has been doing a Clinton impersonation, I must have missed the part where GWB sold military secrets to China, raised taxes, weakened our military, kissed the UN's fanny, appointed his wife co-president, ignored Bin Laden, vetoed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, and constantly held his finger in the air to see which way the wind was blowing.
I don't think President Bush is perfect. Nor, I do not see him as the lesser of two evils. He is tackling problems that have been left behind because they are controversial and difficult. He's not hiding out in the Oval Office with his ego.
Your vote is yours to cast as you choose. I wish you well in helping increase the number of conservative members of Congress.
And here I thought it was clever. It is a take off on the Spanish pronunciation of his name. I also believe the man to be what I would call a "political whore", that is one who will sell out for votes. The reason I state that I am an ex-Canadian is to provide some background when I speak to issues of socialism, especially as it pertains to our neighbors up north. I am as American as anyone on this board, perhaps more so than many. I did not choose to be born in Canada, I chose to be American. As for Bush, I don't have any respect for the man because he has traded political expediency for principle.
Guilt by association.
Weak, even for you. You know that libertarians support open borders after eliminating the welfare state. Since 9/11 there's little chance of open borders and with the expansion of federal entitlement programs little chance of reducing, much less eliminating, welfare.
But explain to me how it makes sense to offer an expansion of immigration standards and expanding the welfare state? Or you could just call me a stoner.
I was unaware the Canadian govt had any views on US drug laws. For the most part, Canadian drug laws mirror those in the US.
You forgot; Waco, Elian Gonzalez, James Riady, the Marc Rich pardon, the FALN pardons, the Mel Reynolds pardon, EO that put our military under the control of the UN, the 2 hour 'haircut' on the tarmac at LAX, the surplus/tax cut comment in Buffalo NY ('what if y'all don't spend it right'), supporting the KLA radical muslims, the impotent CRUISE missle attacks on non-critical targets, absconding of public lands thru executive orders, etc.
These people are incredible!
Bashing Bush only serves to help the democrats who will, if they gain power, immediately grant citizenship to the illegals.
They = Houses of Congress as well as White House.
BTW, a democrat president will appoint Ruth-Bader-Ginsberg clones. Count on it. Before you mention him, yes, Souter was apppointed by 41, proving that mistakes are made.
The welfare state today is no higher as a percentage of GDP then it was during any of Reagans 8 years as president.
The premise of your question is false.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.