Conservative groups break with Republican leadership

The Washington Times ^ | 1/16/2004 | Ralph Z. Hallow

[Ricardo4CP]

National leaders of six conservative organizations yesterday broke with the Republican majorities in the House and Senate, accusing them of spending like "drunken sailors," and had some strong words for President Bush as well...

[Ricardo4CP]

Well stated Afronaut. The only change I would have would be "if it looks like a donkey..."


-Ricardo

[eskimo]

We ask nothing from others for our liberty, but we are all well aware that the enemy not only needs enslave us to labor for their utopia, they wish to rob us of our wealth and destroy our children and lives into the bargain. Is this not a large enough cause to find some common ground with those that do not believe as you do on all points (or may be total lunatics as well) as long as we can find a fulcrum to leverage our combined strength to crush our common foes?

If we can all agree that the cause is conserving liberty under our constitution, and we can all agree that we must rid ourselves of those in government who would work against that cause, then we should be able to agree on who are the "common foes".

[Ricardo4CP]

We have a GOP Congress and a GOP president, should we not be seeing some indication of having reached the apogee of the curve?

I'm sorry, I just don't.

Bush has two more years after the election before entering the lame duck phase, how he'll be able to turn around his self induced leftist social agenda is beyond me.

As just a regular Joe Taxpayer, all I can do is bitch and scream as loud as possible about this sellout of principles, and that I intend to do, wherever and whenever I can.

A bit of advice: Karl Rove, et. al. could care less about screaming and hollering. At this point even not voting for W. this time around wouldn't get their attention.

Giving your money to support the Constitution Party and volunteering to help build the party will raise some eyebrows.

Helping elect a Constitution Party candidate for a federal seat against a liberal Republican would look like a five-alarm fire.

The current power structure in Washington knows that as long as the grassroots does not invest their political capital in a real conservative resistance they can do pretty much what they want.

If not now, when?

-Ricardo

[Ricardo4CP]

*PINGGG!*

[putupon]

I may take your advice, do they have a candidate with potential?

A split vote costing an incumbent RINO would wake up a few people too and replacing a House RINO with a RAT would be no great loss.

[The_Eaglet]

Thanks for the PING!

[The_Eaglet]

Asked for comment, Christine Iverson, spokeswoman for Republican National Chairman Ed Gillespie, said that while the last Clinton budget "proposed a 15 percent increase for spending unrelated to national defense, homeland security, entitlement programs and interest on the national debt," the first Bush budget "proposed lowering this increase to 6 percent, the second budget to below 5 percent and the latest to 2 percent for next year."
But conservative critics said that Congress opted to spend far more, and Mr. Bush didn't move to stop it.

I would like to know how this issue is addressed at CPAC.

[The_Eaglet]

The best advice I can give is to keep after the Congress.

Good words of advice Jim!

I will bump to that.

[stocksthatgoup]

So is howard dean evidence of left wing groups leaving the Democratic party leadership?

[The_Eaglet]

First Amendment Treats for the Rich-Campaign Finance Reform thread-day 38

[BigSkyFreeper]

No

[jimkress]

No. The point you do not get is that no matter whether you vote for a 'Republican' or 'Democrat' presidential candidate you will still get a Liberal in the White House. Bush has proven that with his complicity in CFR 1st Amendment destruction and associated IRS abuse, horrific entitlement spending increases (e.g Medicare), etc.

Bush is a Republican Liberal. His only difference with Liberals in the Democrat wing of the Liberal establishment is that his priorities for Big Government are slightly different from theirs - but with the same goal, complete subservience of Americans to their government and its associated political class.

[Jim Robinson]

I'll continue to support the Republicans. Thank you very much.

[jimkress]

Then I'd suggest (from a "truth in advertising" perspective) you change the word 'conservative' to 'Republican' on the FR home page. They are not synonyms.

[Jim Robinson]

Whatever.

[patriot_wes]

I was present for keynote addresses by Alan Keyes and Bay Buchanen on Friday and Saturday and folks we are in deep trouble now that the senate and congressional RINO's have joined with the RATS. They have done nothing all of this time they've held majority positions but kiss "demobutt" and hide their sad selves in their offices.

I voted for Bush and support the Irac incursion but with what is going on in our balance of trade needs and the flow of every creepy thing coming UNCHECKED across the borders we are on course to soon lose America. Very unfortunate.

[no_problema]

most folks knew going in that the bushes never were conservatives. grandfather bush up in connecticut as a u.s. senator spent money like the rockefellers.

to split the republican party is stupid, if not evil.

likewise, the democrats moved to the left and look where they're at--out of power.

to split the republican party means to go out of power.

centrists rule in america, whether republican or democrat.