When Bush Loses In November, He Will Have No One To Blame But Himself

Chuck Baldwin Ministries ^ | 01-23-04 | Baldwin, Chuck

[Theodore R.]

When Bush Loses In November, He Will Have No One To Blame But Himself

By Chuck Baldwin

Food For Thought From The Chuck Wagon

January 23, 2004 Let me be the first one to say it: President Bush is on track to lose in November, and it won't matter who his Democratic opponent is. His fabrications, deceptions, and prevarications are just too much to stomach. His duplicity rivals anything in the previous administration, a Republican name plate notwithstanding.

It's hard to think of anything this president has done right. His policies are every bit as socialist (or fascist) as the most liberal Democrat. We have lost more freedoms during the last three years than we had lost during the previous thirty! Even though Bush has enjoyed Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, neither conservatives nor constitutionalists can point to a single victory Bush has given them. Not one!

Babies are still being aborted at an escalating rate. The Bush administration has done as much (or more) to promote the homosexual agenda as any Democrat. Bush has proliferated the growth of federal spending and corresponding federal deficits to levels not seen in decades. Furthermore, he has created the embryo of a giant Orwellian police state while at the same time offering amnesty and legitimacy to foreign criminals who have invaded our country. If all of that isn't bad enough, Bush even threw his support behind the Clinton gun ban!

Due to Bush's dismal record, the Democratic nominee (whoever he is) will have to work at losing this election. The facade of a "wartime" president is wearing thin. Moreover, gas and oil prices have skyrocketed since oilmen Bush and Cheney rode into Washington, D.C. In addition, without a willingness to cut spending, Bush's tax cuts are a fraud! And now Bush wants to spend an additional billion dollars annually (where this money is coming from nobody knows) to send men to Mars. Get real!

Beyond that, Bush has repeatedly stated that his war against Iraq was fought for the purpose of "enforcing the demands of the United Nations." Now, isn't that lovely? Does he really expect us to re-elect him President of these United States after hearing that he ordered more than 500 brave, patriotic Americans to die in Iraq on behalf of the UN? Does he think we are a bunch of morons? He must.

G.W. Bush deserves to be a one-term president. And the truth is, the nation won't be worse off with a Democratic replacement. At least with a Democrat in the White House, Republicans in Congress might decide to actually oppose liberal policies.

With a liberal Democrat in the White House, a president might get 40% of his agenda through Congress. Bush, on the other hand, will get 80% of his policies through Congress, and Bush's policies are every bit as bad as any liberal Democrat's. So, you tell me who is actually "the lesser of two evils."

(If you would like to track the ongoing Bush record, go to http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/bushrecord.html.)

Therefore, when Bush loses in November, he will have no one to blame but himself.

© Chuck Baldwin

[Cultural Jihad]

I have absolutely no respect for this man or his party.

Then you have no respect for FreeRepublic, it's contributors, or its owner. As such you are a freeloader, and freeloaderism is a type of socialism.

[MEG33]

Yawn

[afropick]

Have we forgotten our lessons from the clinton era. Democrats have proven time after time that they are incapable of defending us. Somalia, Khobart Towers, WTC93, and Kenya and Clinton's failure to respond forcefully led to 9/11. I have many issues with Pres Bush, but I am not willing to go back to those times again.

[Cultural Jihad]

That is fine. Anyone unable to think clearly can come back when they regain their ability. There is nothing wrong with sitting it out when one's emotions get the better of oneself.

[MEG33]

Did I misread your post?Were you talking about Chuck Baldwin? If so,I apologize.

[EternalVigilance]

'Upchuck' is just about the perfect descriptive word for most of what comes from this guy's keyboard.

Frankly, I don't know why the Constition Party folks see fit to identify themselves with such unsubstantiated, unresearched , ignorant tripe.

Having said that, I consider the attacks on them on this thread, accusing them of somehow being racists, is of similiar low quality. I just haven't ever seen any evidence of that whatsoever.

I'm surprised that Howard Phillips and Jim Clymer have chosen to go down the Buchanan path. This is a strain of the conservative movement that has obviously not regained their sanity on a number of issues.

Thank God that their numbers are quite small.

[Cultural Jihad]

I apologize for misreading your post. By "this man and his party" you had meant Baldwin and the CP.

[honeygrl]

"Nobody give's a rat's a** about your happiness, Kev. Nobody."

You you presume to speak on behalf of all people now?

Well Kevin, I'm happy that you are happy. I'd be happier myself if I could decide where my vote is going. This decision is a very hard one for me.

[MEG33]

RE read his post and I believe he wasn't talking about Bush and the Republican Party..but Baldwin and the Constitution Party.

[Cultural Jihad]

Yes, you are right.

[sinkspur]

Just wait. Don't make any decisions based on the nonsense spewed out by the Bush-haters here.

The election's ten months off.

[honeygrl]

"I bet if you scratch real hard you'll find that the Constitution Party is two burlap sacks and a can of kerosene short of a good cross burning. "

Care to tell us what issues you disagree with that the Constitution Party has on the website?

[MEG33]

Please see that we have apologized for misreading your post!

[JasonC]

And when he wins, guys like this won't deserve, or get, any of the credit.

[Tall_Texan]

Personally, I'm disappointed in some of the less-than-conservative positions Bush has taken so I can sympathize with those who want to break from the party but, in the long run, it can only be counterproductive as the Dems found out with the Green Party in 2000.

I'm no Bush-hater but I wish I could see more conservatism than what he's displayed so far. It won't cost my vote, however. I'll not soon forget the eight years of Clinton and the cost we incurred from it.

[EternalVigilance]

My comment in #186 was directed mainly at you. As misguided as some of these folks may be in their distaste for the President, what evidence do you have that the CP is at all racist?

I've seen their very, very limited efforts around the country for years, and engaged many of their leaders in extensive conversations, and I've never gotten even a whiff of it ever.

If you don't have any evidence, perhaps you might want to retract? I don't think you want to be like Chuck Baldwin, right?

[MississippiMan]

If the Dems can put forth a coherent challenger, Bush will lose. When Dean was flying high, it was looking like an impossbility. But if Kerry winds up with the nomination, barring a new military crisis around election time, Bush will lose. Since his election, he has steadily turned broken-glass Republicans into why-bother Republicans.

MM

[EternalVigilance]

Whoops. Now 186 and 196 were meant for you.

[honeygrl]

I actually fear for FR's very existence in the lead up to the next election. Will we get nabbed in some Bravo Sierra lawsuit under the new McCain-Feingold Act?

I was worried about that too. I haven't read the bill so I've had to rely on what other freepers I trust to tell the truth to gather the meaning of it.

Jim: What do you think about his question. Can that Act effect freerepublic? I'm sure it could effect some of FRN if they wanted to run any ads near the election. I honestly don't know if they normally do that or not, but it seems like something they may have been interested in doing had this law not been passed.

[Cultural Jihad]

The goal is to vote the 'Rats out, not to waste one's vote on self-indulgent and non-productive feeeel good voting. The CP doesn't have a chance at winning any election, hence a vote for them is the same as not voting at all. One's conscience should dictate whether wasting one's vote is shirking one's responsibility to one's national community.