Skip to comments.
So you think George W. Bush is not a conservative?
SOTU transcript ^
| 1/22/04
Posted on 01/22/2004 7:07:09 AM PST by Wolfstar
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 761-780, 781-800, 801-820 ... 2,001-2,015 next last
To: Doctor Stochastic
One can only strive for the best result possible, not the best possible result.Excellent point (and not a bad tag, if it would fit).
To: Bikers4Bush
His proposal allows them to pay some BS penalty and then remain here working while they will be permitted to pursue citizenship. That not the same as having a green card. They will still be required to enter into the lottery to win a green card just like every other immigrant. By the way, FYI, Mexicans are not allowed to enter for a green card.
782
posted on
01/22/2004 11:03:54 AM PST
by
m1-lightning
(Weapons of deterrence do not deter terrorists; people of deterrence do.)
To: CSM
"
No, you haven't earned it. It is a precious gift given to you by those that have earned it. It is still your right to vote."
Actually her right to vote was specifically granted to her by the 19th Amendment, in 1920.
To: BJClinton
"This is a forum to discuss, among other things, ideas. Just because Dubya is the lesser of 2 evils doesn't mean a FReeper should quit the forum for not voting for him."
IMO, yes it does.
"Free Republic" got its name, I'm pretty sure, from the idea that we should fight to preserve our freedom. If you want Bush to lose, it follows that you'd rather have a Democrat president, and thus have our country become far less free.
784
posted on
01/22/2004 11:05:25 AM PST
by
zook
To: BureaucratusMaximus; Jim Robinson
So with that kind of logic, I'll expect to see your opus posted here shortly, as FR is a conservative forum, and GWB is not a conservative. Anyone who is not a conservative, or does not support a conservative is someone I consider my political enemy.I'll alert the owner; he's on record as supporting the reelection of George W. Bush.
785
posted on
01/22/2004 11:05:46 AM PST
by
Howlin
To: Wolfstar; All
Thank you for posting this thread.
BUSH/CHENEY 04 ... FOR THE SAKE OF THE NATION
786
posted on
01/22/2004 11:05:58 AM PST
by
MEG33
To: Mo1
"Do you like he refuses to act in the best interest of this country?"
On a number of issues, yes I do.
"Do you think he doesn't care about this country?"
I'm not sure if it's him or those whispering in his ear but it's clear that someone doesn't care.
"Do you think he doesn't care about the american people?"
I think he cares more about illegal aliens than legal citizens.
787
posted on
01/22/2004 11:06:05 AM PST
by
Bikers4Bush
(Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
To: Nanodik
You're under the impression this is a game?
Telling.
788
posted on
01/22/2004 11:06:39 AM PST
by
Howlin
To: Bikers4Bush
I find it strange that you would choose THIS time to give up after 20+ years, when we are under great threat of attack, and we have a President who is successfully waging a war on terror, standing firmly for America and democracy abroad, and restoring the military.
Why NOW, when we can literally be DESTROYED if we get a Dem in the White House??
Does that really make SENSE to you??
789
posted on
01/22/2004 11:06:56 AM PST
by
ohioWfan
(BUSH 2004 - Leadership, Integrity, Morality)
To: Southack
On the other hand, my abortion ban test would tell you to vote for Bush. That would get you someone who has already banned one form of abortion, killed the Kyoto Global Warming nonsense, withdrawn from the U.S. - CCCP ABM treaty restraints (so that we can defend our nation), cut taxes, cut regulations, and put conservative judges onto the federal roster. Even on these issues, it's a mixed bag. Bush signed onto the junk science conclustion that global warming is a reality so this creates a disconnect with his Kyoto stance; Abortion wasn't banned - p.b. abortion ban was killed the next day by the federal courts (and will be finally killed in USSC) and Mr. Bush doesn't appear to have any stomach for taking on the courts. Why doesn't he and the jellyfish in Congress sponsor a constitutional amendment banning abortion? Most of the country opposes abortion. Nothing to lose anyway! He seems to be afraid of offending liberals. His spokesman went along with that ABOMINATION of a decision that removed teh 10 commandment monument from the Alabama Courthouse, and as the other poster pointed out, Bush praised the pro-quota decision in Michigan.
Who is willing to FIGHT the courts? Who? Apparently not Mr. Bush. He did come out against the Mass. State court ruling on gay marriage, but I haven't seen him champion an amendment to save marriage. He spoke of it like a last resort in his speech - last resort? I'd say the TIME IS NOW to nip it in the bud. Does Mr. Bush think his threat of an amendment will scare the gay radicals and activist judges away from fully implementing gay marriage in America? You tell me - what is he thinking?
790
posted on
01/22/2004 11:07:09 AM PST
by
exmarine
( sic semper tyrannis)
To: Republican Wildcat
Please show me where I ever said I was perfectly willing to allow all those things to happen.
Until you do keep your mouth shut about what I am or am not willing to do.
791
posted on
01/22/2004 11:07:24 AM PST
by
Bikers4Bush
(Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
To: duckln
stay at home come Nov 8th..
That would be a good thing for that day imo......... Maybe we could designate it is as the REPUBLICANS HOME DAY
792
posted on
01/22/2004 11:08:03 AM PST
by
deport
( Owen, Kuhl, Brown, Pickering, Pryor, Allen.. [Estrada, they won])
To: Howlin
My point is that Bush is more dangerous than a democrat.Unbelievable. What sort of twisted logic enables that kind of thinking. Among the bashers there's kind of a "moral equivalency" perspective which sees absolutely no distinction between Bush and the Democrats. What causes that kind of warped perspective? I said in an earlier comment on this thread that I think it stems not from legitimate ideology, but from a severe personality disorder. The inability to see gradations of moral difference, particular when the differences are striking, between Bush and the Democrats says more about the person who is blind to contrasts than it does the character of the President. Many of these people are morally bankrupt, I believe. Their only guide is apparently their own twisted view of the world -- they want what they want, and to he!! with everyone else. These debates reveal something disturbing -- We're not arguing with people who have a healthy and normal moral foundation.
793
posted on
01/22/2004 11:08:20 AM PST
by
My2Cents
("Failure is not an option.")
To: Bikers4Bush
I think he cares more about illegal aliens than legal citizens.Never mind answering my last question.
Sense is not your strong suit......
794
posted on
01/22/2004 11:08:31 AM PST
by
ohioWfan
(BUSH 2004 - Leadership, Integrity, Morality)
To: WoofDog123
"Actually her right to vote was specifically granted to her by the 19th Amendment, in 1920."
The key word is "granted". Blood was spilled to establish this country, blood was spilled to maintain this countries freedom. Without that blood, the document that contains the 19th would no longer exist. Those that spilled that blood and those that are willing to give their blood to maintain that document are the people who "earn" the rights. The rest of society is just beneficiaries of that gift from them.
It is still a right to all citizens of age. That right is a gift and should be appreciated as such!
795
posted on
01/22/2004 11:08:35 AM PST
by
CSM
(Council member Carol Schwartz (R.-at large), my new hero! The Anti anti Smoke Gnatzie!)
To: JFC
Good for you, be sure to vote.
796
posted on
01/22/2004 11:08:52 AM PST
by
Bikers4Bush
(Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
To: zook
Yep. It refers to keeping our republic free, not to freely allowing all kinds of harmful tripe to be posted. And anyone who thinks we'll be a freer republic if Bush is defeated is posting harmful tripe. Are you wearing your jackboots and brown shirt? I think Hitler said something similar. I think you need to read the 1st amendment.
797
posted on
01/22/2004 11:08:59 AM PST
by
exmarine
( sic semper tyrannis)
To: deport
If the bashers want to stay home on Nov. 8th, that's ok. The election is Nov. 2nd.
798
posted on
01/22/2004 11:09:18 AM PST
by
My2Cents
("Failure is not an option.")
To: Warren_Piece
Being from TN, I can tell you that guns weren't even in the top 5 of issues in either case.
Well, you have your opinion. I know that the top strategists of both parties, having discounted the South's Republican realignment, concluded that the gun nut turnout in those two states carried the day.
Your mileage may vary. I'll go with the self-proclaimed party experts on this one. As far as evidence, I do notice that the Dims seem to believe it, just as they believed it after losing the House in '94, because they won't touch gun control with a ten-foot pole since 2000.
Ironically, the primary national advocate of gun control since 2000 has been Bush speechifying that he wants to renew the AWB. As a countermeasure, I write to Tom DeLay regularly to beg him to save me from Bush's gungrabbing impulses!
Okay, I'll admit that the AWB thing is a little bit of a dog-and-pony show for the goofy soccer moms... Still, Bush shouldn't dangle red meat in front of the Brady Bunch.
To: My2Cents
And now along comes somebody who believes Jim Robinson should OPUS on his own forum...........ROFLMAO.
800
posted on
01/22/2004 11:09:28 AM PST
by
Howlin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 761-780, 781-800, 801-820 ... 2,001-2,015 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson