Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

George Delano Bush
World Net Daily ^ | January 26,2004 | Vox Day

Posted on 01/26/2004 11:36:44 AM PST by yatros from flatwater

George Delano Bush


Posted: January 26, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Vox Day


© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

George Bush met with some skeptical listeners in his recent State of the Union address, but he truly convinced me of something. He convinced me that the Republican Party, as the party of small government, is dead. Oh, I understand very well that in terms of electoral votes, the Republicans have seldom had a future that looked more immediately promising, but the party is nevertheless a soulless zombie of an institution.

Or rather, make that a vampire. For the Bush administration is sucking the lifeblood out of the United States with every raising of the federal debt roof, with every new federal entitlement, with every new Clintonian promise to end someone's pain somewhere, somehow. Consider the following federal spending increases:

This is not even Clinton-lite, this is simply armed left-liberalism. Note that the increase in domestic departments dwarfs the increase in defense spending during a time of war. This is astounding!

Now, the president's defenders argue that President Bush has no choice, that the exigencies of the War on Terror require that he accommodate his Democratic opposition in order to free his hand for his duties as commander-in-chief. But this is precisely backward! Wars do not prevent chief executives from driving the domestic agenda – in fact, history supports the opposite premise.

Did FDR refrain from his radical program of nationalization once the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in order to accommodate his conservative opposition? On the contrary, he put the pedal to the metal and increased government spending to the greatest share of the economy it has yet known. From this, I conclude that President Bush is doing exactly what he intended from the start, but he is using the war as an excuse to placate his hoodwinked conservative allies instead of using it as a political weapon to bludgeon his enemies on the radical left.

But if the Republican Party is dead, where can those who believe in republicanism, small government, individual freedom and the Constitution go? Right now, there are two places: the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party. Either, in my opinion, are vastly preferable to the empty charade of the GOP.

Ultimately, both parties must eventually merge into one Freedom Party, which will certainly require some level of initially uneasy assimilation. Some libertarians will need to accept that abortion is a violation of the unborn child's unalienable right to life, while conservatives will need to recognize that drugs are not an appropriate target of federal warfare. Christians will have to understand that using the state to enforce traditional morality will always backfire in the end, and everyone will have to wake up to the fact that government largesse is nothing more than poisoned bait.

George Bush has not destroyed the Republican Party by himself, he is merely the culmination of 24 years of false promises. Actions speak much louder than words, though, and his resemble none of his predecessors so much as Franklin Delano Roosevelt, expanding central government and eradicating individual liberties during a time of war. He could have been George Jefferson Bush, or even George Reagan Bush, instead, he chose to become George Delano.

As the November elections approach, there are those who will say that one must simply accept the inevitable and vote for the lesser of two evils. To them, I will only say that regardless of whether it is big or small, supporting evil is anathema to any man who seeks the good, the right and the true. Three political generations of Republican promises of future virtue to follow the whoring of Republican principles should be enough for any honest conservative to abjure the party once and for all. I did so 12 years ago – I have never regretted it for a moment.

It is painful to admit that one has been betrayed. It is even more painful to see the rock roll down the hill, and know that one must begin pushing it back up again. But every journey begins with a first step, and sometimes wisdom requires embracing what the world believes to be folly.


Vox Day is a novelist and Christian libertarian. He is a member of the SFWA, Mensa and the Southern Baptist Convention, and has been down with Madden since 1992. His weekly column is syndicated nationally by Universal Press Syndicate. Visit his web log, Vox Popoli, for daily commentary and responses to reader email.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; conservatism; constitution; gop; sotu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last
To: Southflanknorthpawsis
I don't worship them and you are a foolish person to assume so. Another sore spot for a genuine conservative is amnesty. Another is big government spending. (Remember the Republican rally cry 'shrink the size of government' mantra? Or are you too young?)

You can throw out your silly "you are a waste of time" mantra, but it comes off as juvenile.

Listen pup, I've been involved in "R" politics deeply for my entire adult life. I've been a delegate to national conventions.

You? I don't know nor do I care.

What I do care about is a nation blindly and ignorantly voting without thinking. It would appear you fall into that category.

41 posted on 01/26/2004 1:12:45 PM PST by JOAT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
Post #39 is excellent.
42 posted on 01/26/2004 1:13:03 PM PST by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
How many times are you gonna cut-n-paste the same statement today, you're at about 75 now, are you going for 150?

Yikes!! LOL. Did we hit the "leaded" coffee when we were reaching for de-caf?

I'll take your word for it since we seem to agree more often than not. I'm a little late getting on FR this afternoon so I haven't seen all the duplications but keep them suckers honest.

43 posted on 01/26/2004 1:15:06 PM PST by geedee (Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JOAT
FYI, I'm not a pup, but you are certainly a newbie or a retread. What's your real agenda and who do you think you're fooling?
44 posted on 01/26/2004 1:15:33 PM PST by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: yatros from flatwater
Hello!..... ALL spending allocation begins in the house of reps.. filtered thought the Senate... and OKed or vetoed by the Prez... the President can ONLY spend what he's given by those two bodies.. his recommendations are merely that... UNLESS he were given a line item VETO... since thats not happening anywhere near soon since the Supremes said that is UNconstitutional.. Actually ALL legislation begins in congress..

Presidents merely adjust to or lobby for Executive branch wish lists... conservatism died when Newt went and got himself "BORK'ed"... a lesson not lost on most republicans in the house.. -OR- the Senate.. took the backbone right out of conservatism.. conservatism NOW is merely a jellatinous mass of "shop till you drop'ers" spending other peoples money like a Mexican in a leather goods store prepareing for Cinco de Mayo...

Left democrats scatching their heads at the genius of it all.. so they started bleating about a balanced budget... and howling like vampires struck in the eyes by sunshine.. and the poor dumb sheeple have parasitical bats hanging off them like some skin head PROUDLY getting pierced through every possible orifice of his body as a political statement..

WOT A CUNTRY....

45 posted on 01/26/2004 1:20:21 PM PST by hosepipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
Gosh, once again a very reasoned response from you.

Ahem

A. Why do you assume I would bother to try to "fool" you?

The reality is, there are millions of conservatives who see some serious problems with GWB. You are freaking out because that is being stated, and go into denial/ridicule mode.

B. I have long since given up trying to even to reason with zealots like you.

BTW, I used to be one until I saw the real face of my party. The complete lack of concern for anything but assuming or maintaining power. No lofty principles to live by, just winning the next election. Have seen it up close and personal working campaigns and it is repulsive.

46 posted on 01/26/2004 1:23:57 PM PST by JOAT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
You're confused.

In your first paragraph, you want Bush to follow.

In your second, you want Bush to lead.

47 posted on 01/26/2004 1:28:08 PM PST by Vision Thing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JOAT
Hey old-timer..... The BS meter maxed out when you defended yourself by boasting of your political/Republican credentials.

Boy, that sure made me shiver with respect and awe. Bwahahahahahahaha !!!!!!

48 posted on 01/26/2004 1:31:50 PM PST by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
Wow, you are a master debater.
49 posted on 01/26/2004 1:32:46 PM PST by JOAT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
You haven't added anything to this thread but ad hominem attacks. Just because one has a recent sign up date doesn't make one politically ignorant or infer an ulterior motive.

The argument has been stated clearly and without any subtlety. Your failure to answer the points and mindlessly attack the speaker speaks volumes about you. What is YOUR motive?
50 posted on 01/26/2004 1:33:33 PM PST by Durus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
(Of course you can't defend the position so you try to flame.)

Grow up.

51 posted on 01/26/2004 1:33:56 PM PST by JOAT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
yatros from flatwater
Since Dec 3, 1997
52 posted on 01/26/2004 1:40:23 PM PST by sarcasm (Tancredo 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: JOAT
The complete lack of concern for anything but assuming or maintaining power.

Any political party,including Libertarian,Green or Constitution , is interested in taking ,and remaining in ,power. To think otherwise is ludicrous,and you're sharp enough to know that. Am I thrilled with everything coming out? No. Is there a real, viable alternative? Hell No! So,my choice remains stay with te Republicasn, stay with George W. Bush(the President not my posting buddy ;-) )and work like crazy to help them realize they have a spine, and forget the media. That's me and that's the direction I am taking.

53 posted on 01/26/2004 1:40:41 PM PST by gatorbait (Yesterday, today and tomorrow......The United States Army)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Durus; JOAT
You half-percenters are just a cut above blatant disruptors.

All you want to do is whine because nothing is ever good enough for you.

You demand perfection, knowing all the while that it is impossible.

As far as I and many others are concerned, you are just as guilty of aiding and abetting the radical left as a card-carrying liberal.

If you want to play the not-a-nickel's-worth-of-difference-in-the-two-parties game, why do you find it necessary to come to a website that tends to favor Republicans for your rant?

Why do you care? Or is it simply because without bitching and moaning, you have nothing left to talk about.....nothing to offer?

54 posted on 01/26/2004 1:46:41 PM PST by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: sarcasm
........and that is supposed to mean?

Looks as if you have a hard time keeping track of what is said to whom. Why am I not a bit surprised?

55 posted on 01/26/2004 1:48:41 PM PST by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
You still have not answer the substance of the arguement.
56 posted on 01/26/2004 1:49:36 PM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
LOL....... you still here entertaining the troops I see.... I noticed even the Pattie himself wrote respectful piece today admitting that President Bush has a much greater grasp of politics than his father.... Of course he should as he was drubbed in 2000 by him....
57 posted on 01/26/2004 1:58:35 PM PST by deport (BUSH - CHENEY 2004.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: RiflemanSharpe
There is no substance to the argument. Bush is not as conservative as some may wish. Some things go against their wishes. But the gist and purpose of this article is to fuel the argument that George Bush vs. Pick-your-favorite-Democrat is no choice.

It is pointless to argue to your deaf ears, but I think there are numerous points that defy this claim and if you were honest, you would admit it.

Just for starters, why don't you explain how Al Gore would have been no worse for America, post 9-11, and how an anti-war kook in the WH next year will make no difference.

Or maybe it's that you actually have no problem with partial birth abortion.

Wait.....maybe it's that silly old Supreme Court. Yeah, that's it. It makes no difference who appoints justices to the SCOTUS; they're all the same. Right?

58 posted on 01/26/2004 2:04:30 PM PST by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
Can you do more than toss (baseless) insults around?

I am a Republican who fears for his party. If you are content to vote for anyone who has an R in front of their name, despite what they actually do in office so be it. You and your ilk have done far more to aid the radical left then anyone who votes their principles. Do you have any, (IE:principles) other then getting rino's elected?
59 posted on 01/26/2004 2:05:41 PM PST by Durus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
why do you find it necessary to come to a website that tends to favor Republicans for your rant?

You sir, have done a fine job of demonstrating your lack of depth and substance. You have yet to answer any criticisms of the problem. You are a name-caller and nothing more.

Rather than any reasoned adult debate you just yell "disrupter!" because "ya got nuthin."

What you seem utterly incapable of grasping is that one can be concerned, and still be conservative.

It is a far better to state to understand and recognize a problem exists on your own side of the aisle than to bury one's head in the sand or clamp one's hands over his ears and scream "This isn't happening!"

Your only responses thus far have fallen into that category. Tell me, can you debate like a grown-up?

60 posted on 01/26/2004 2:07:17 PM PST by JOAT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson