VANITY: The best way to keep America a sovereign free nation is to keep the Democrats out of power!

Free Republic

[Jim Robinson]

Will Bush solve the illegal immigration problem? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush solve the government spending problem? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush solve the campaign finance problem? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush solve the drug war problem? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush solve the nation's education problems? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush solve the so-called healthcare problems? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush solve the so-called environmental problems? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush solve the social security problems? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush solve the medicare problems? Probably not. But neither will Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark or Hillary. Chances are, they'd make it worse. Probably far worse.

Will Bush defend America from those bent on destroying her? You'd better bet your sweet bippy he will.

Will any of the Democrats defend America? Hell no they won't. They'd rather turn us over to the U.N. They'd surrender to the French Foreign Legion if given the chance.

Will Bush appoint conservative judges? Yup!

Will Kerry, Edwards, Clark, Hillary, et al, appoint conservative judges? Yeah, right. And hell will freeze over tomorrow.

Will Bush continue reducing taxes? Yup.

Will Kerry, Edwards, Clark, Hillary, et al, raise your taxes as soon as they possibly can if given the opportunity and continue raising them until hell freezes over? Yup.

Will Bush defend the right to life? Check

Will Bush defend marriage between a man a woman? Check

Will Bush defend the right to keep and bear arms? Check

Will Bush say no to Kyoto? Check.

Will Bush say no to a world court? Check.

Will Bush say no to the U.N.? Check.

Will Kerry, Edwards, Clark, Hillary, et al, remove our national sovereignty and subjugate America to world government? Just as quickly as they possibly can if given the opportunity.

Will any other person be elected to the Presidency in 2004 other than Bush (God willing) or a Democrat? Obviously not.

Doesn't make a lick of sense to me to allow the America hating, freedom hating Democrats back into power now that we've kicked them out.

Say yes to sovereignty for America and continued freedom for all Americans.

Say no to the RATS!!

[You Dirty Rats]

Even if I was the type of person to call people names, I couldn't do it -- because I can't name one Constitutional Party Member.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

I find it hilarious that you, claiming great principles, feel the need to demean those of us who have different opinions than yours as sheep.

I've never stood on any soapboxes preaching about principles. All I'm merely doing is discussing my unhappiness with Bush's liberal policies. The last time I looked, this was a conservative news discussion forum, not a Republican Party feel-good rabble-rouser.

And since you're insisting that something is wrong with us unless we agree with YOU, what the HELL does that make you, other than a lockstepper?

I'm not saying that something is wrong with you people. The "sheep" comment hurt, didn't it? It wasn't meant as an insult; it was more of an adjective to describe the lack of objective discussion on this thread.

[Beck_isright]

Thank you.

[goodnesswins]

"What we all need to do is keep trying to move more citizens to the Right -- which will elect more Republicans and more conservatives -- and that in turn moves the Presidency to the Right."

GET outta my brain.....my thoughts exactly! I wanted to ask this group.....what percent of the American VOTING public are what could be considered CONSERVATIVE? Hmmmm??

[Jim Robinson]

I doubt it.

[Lazamataz]

Although, I have serious problems with leaving a blank and risking one of these RATS' getting into the WH. It's certainly not a risk I'd want to take as a Conservative, no matter how vehemently I opposed some of the President's policies.

I think Rove has done the political calculus.

I think he knows full well he's going to lose the staunch conservatives.

And I don't think he cares.

[DrDeb]

I invite you to read "Dereliction of Duty"!

The military officer who wrote this book didn't think electing a Democrat in 1992 would make that much difference, so he didn't bother to vote.

Later, this same military officer carried the "football" for Clinton and lived to regret his cavalier attitude. He saw 'up close and personal' the devastation that a 'derelict' President could wreak on a military and a country is just 4 short years!

[I also recommend that you read "Losing Bin Laden" by Richard Miniter and "The Final Days" by Barbara Olson!]

Again, inform yourself before making illogical, irrational and irresponsible comments!

[Ophiucus]

Gotcha sarcasm control issue...careful, don't run through gasoline flicking lit matches. :-)

[Mo1]

We're in the minority, Jim. But 3rd parties were supposedly in the minority in 2000, too - and we all know what happened then.

And you think a threat like that will help your party?

Another 8 years of Clinton hack swill promote your party?

I'm thinking it will be the reverse

[Brad’s Gramma]

LOL!!!

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

YOU have got to be KIDDING ME.....you're PROUD of being a Third Party Spoiler....we almost got Gored, and YOU ARE PROUD OF IT?

But...but...we 3rd party "spoilers" were supposed to be irrelevant in 2000. Our votes were suppose to represent .00001% or something like that.

Don't get mad at us for almost causing Bush's demise. Blame the liberal media, illegal aliens, vote fraud, Dem dirty tricks, and enough conservatives staying home because Bush's proposals were Gore-lite.

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

None of the groups appear to believe in private propety rights, which is the foundation of true freedom. Both groups advocate using the Federal government to solve local problems. Both groups like to spend taxpayer money (confiscated by the threat of force). Don't get me wrong, out of the two, the Republicans are better, but neither group would be viewed very favorably by Mr. Jefferson.

[Ophiucus]

Sitting out the election, and not exercising your right to vote is, IMO, being a lousy American.

YES! BINGO!! I got flamed for that position in the other threads....argh!!

[Mo1]

Those are excellent book choices ... Thanks for mentioning them

[Nanodik]

Hmmm blocking judges so the Dems could push their agenda didn't lead to more socialism?

The blocking judges thing is really only an issue with the SCOTUS when it comes to stopping socialism. The only time I can think that this was an issue was with Bork, so if you want to claim that all this would have been made better by having Bork on the SCOTUS then go ahead but I don't think too many people will believe you.

[Howlin]

And no doubt hoping it happens again.

[PhiKapMom]

Your 33% is even more wrong! You should have checked the AP article that is out on the NEA instead of using Drudge:

Excerpted from the AP article that came out tonight about Funding for the NEA:

First lady Laura Bush made Thursday's announcement, saying the president would ask Congress next week for an $18 million increase for the NEA, a 15 percent hike over last year.

The GOP-controlled Congress increased the agency's funding to $122.5 million last year, up from $115.7 million. That's still well below the $175 million it received in 1992.

[kitkat]

***...Of course you conveniently omitted all the liberal domestic policy enacted..***

Conveniently? Well, I'll admit it would be convenient for YOU if you could get me to say Bush is liberal. You do not have a chance in hell of baiting me into saying something I don't believe.

[onyx]

Guess what? This thread is not about you. I'll not reply to you again so have it at; have the last word.

You troll this thread like your the nanny police. All anyone has to do is read your comments on this thread alone to see that you consider yourself in charge of policing everyone else's thoughts and comments.

I have pinged three who can attest to your ugliness.

[Lazamataz]

I sincerely doubt he has a real problem with his base. It's obvious that a lot of conservatives are ticked off (and for good reason), but I don't think it will equate to "millions" of conservatives voting Democrat or third party or not voting at all. When push comes to shove there will be very few in the conservative "base" who will actually reject Bush (or the Republicans) in favor of returning power to the Democrats. That'd be political suicide.

I have the luxury of being able to make a principled stand. In Georgia -- a solid Bush state -- they are not going to miss my vote.

But if we don't get his attention somehow, Bush will continue to tinkle on us all next term. I think it's a pretty safe assumption that Bush is a lock in 2004. SOMEhow he's got to hear our voice, though, or we are in serious trouble.

Frankly, with the prescription drug time bomb, we are already in serious doo-doo.