GOP slams Bush policies at retreat

The Washington Times ^ | 2/6/04 | By Ralph Z. Hallow and James G. Lakely

[Sabertooth]

Really? Paying a fine is a pardon.

According to President Bush, it's a "one-time fee."

The word "fine" is not to be found in the President's proposal.

Well according to you I must have gotten a pardon for the fine I paid for going over the speed limit a couple of years ago.

So, are you now allowed to continue speeding?

If not, then I submit that you got neither a pardon nor Amnesty.

However, under the Bush Amnesty, Illegals would be able to keep the fruits of their lawbreaking, which are their presence and employment in our country.

[Poohbah]

Continue to believe as you want, it is your right, but you are simply unable to see what is happening. For the what the polls are worth, admittedly not too much, Bush has not significantly increased his share of "independent voters."

I'm sure Presidents Mondale and Dukakis appreciated the fact that Reagan and GHWB didn't have significant independent support in February 1984 and February 1988.

This will place more importance on the traditional Republicans turning out.

If the trend holds--which it won't.

I probably will because Kerry would be a total disaster, but that does not mean we allow Bush to give away only three quarter's of the store because Kerry would give the whole thing away.

Politics is the art of the possible.

When Congress massively overspends, and then blames Bush for not saving them from their own overspending...and then "true conservatives" who seem ignorant of the Constitution and the powers granted (or denied) to the various branches cheer them on...well, I have a hard time taking those folks seriously.

For your information, I think, believe, and know, that Bush's "proposal" is a betrayal and will be a disaster of yet to be known porportions.

For your information, I think, believe, and know that you are acting like a spoiled child.

Comprende Amigo????

Interesting how people suddenly feel this urge to ineptly throw Spanish around when the topic of re-electing Bush comes up.

[Poohbah]

Bush may not have actually written off that portion of the vote--but it's been obvious that he hasn't counted on it since 2000, either.

Like I said, the self-proclaimed "base" have been no-shows since 1992. Now, they're working very hard to fracture the rest of the party, because they've lost pretty decisively. They have no hope of victory; they merely wish others to share their misery.

[gunnedah]

I may need a padded cell! But I really cant tell the difference between Bush and most Democrats when it comes to spending. The difference is in the taxes and being retire I don't see where it saves me anything and when I get my returns back I expect to pay.
My real thinking is that all of Congress both Democrat and Republican listen to those with the most money to contribute and the polls.It is just a matter of the big money fighting every election to have that access we as ordinary citizens don't have.
Take all of your top Congress people along with the President and go to www.opensecrets.org and trace the money and watch the laws that are enacted and you will eventually come to the conclusion, if you are as smart as you think, that they all are for sale to the highest bidder and some of those bidding are foreign countries that don't have our best interest at heart. Go smell the Rose's and smoke you another joint you will have your awakening one day.
This tip is also free.Those running elections have the money and expertise and know most Americans better than the individual knows self.The ABA and so called "Mainstream Media" runs this country and sets the agenda. I believe with the coming of the INTERNET it will cause some problems for them but lawyers rule!

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

"It's no great secret that some members of Congress don't agree with every single thing the president is doing," said White House spokesman Trent Duffy. "But he is trying to lead the country, to broaden the party. He promoted his ideas and his agenda for those in the room."

This is the problem; "He is trying...to broaden the party".

[David75]

The law is the law - that's what they say with illegal immigrants.

Laws denying the right to bear arms violate the 2nd Amendment and are of no effect. Immigration laws are pursuant to powers of naturalization, granted to Congress in Article I of the Constitution. Big difference

[Bikers4Bush]

The constitution is the first rule of law, anything that goes against it is null.

The homeowner was on private property, his. Illegal aliens are not even in their own country. Big difference.

As for my tagline and screename, they're both mine and regardless of how much you whine and cry there isn't a thing you can do about either.

[LS]

We haven't begun to be heard! I haven't called yet, but will . . . .:)

[hchutch]

No, I can point out the blatant hypocrisy, Bikers4Kerry.

[Sabertooth]

But the self-proclaimed "base" didn't--as they've done since 1992.

Pop quiz time:

What year was the most decisive GOP electoral victory in our lifetimes?

Let me know if you need a hint.

OK, you and your kin are apparently going to vote based on your FEEEEEEEL-INGS.

In other words, y'all are a bunch of liberals.

Liberals or not, do their votes count?

Bush is probably counting on getting more than one vote in exchange for losing yours.

Did you read the article?

Growing frustration over President Bush's immigration plan and lack of fiscal discipline came to a head behind closed doors at last weekend's Republican retreat in Philadelphia.

House lawmakers, stunned by the intensity of their constituents' displeasure at some of Mr. Bush's key domestic policies, gave his political strategist Karl Rove an earful behind closed doors.

< -snip- >

Many House critics of the Bush immigration plan said privately that the proposal was created to win Mr. Bush a larger share of the Hispanic vote in November and to mollify Mexican President Vicente Fox. Mr. Fox has supported relaxed U.S. immigration laws as a means to alleviate economic problems in Mexico.

Mr. Duffy said the president delivered a passionate defense of his immigration plan, telling the Republican caucus that his policy is not a political ploy.

"He said he didn't do it for politics [but] because that's what he believes is good for the country," Mr. Duffy said, adding that Mr. Bush drove his point home by saying, "I'm from Texas and I know this issue."

Well, I'm from California, and the President is dead wrong on Illegals, not only on principle, but on policy and politics as well.

But who needs those stinking votes?

Because the rest of the folks who agree with you, and think as you do, spent a decade slow-rolling the GOP...well, you're going to suffer.

Listen to you. What a coalition-builder.

Quit blaming Bush, and start blaming the folks who talked much, demanded much more, and never delivered anything in return.

Here's a question for your electoral calculus:

If a party has a constuency that can deliver decisive victories when motivated, and yet that party suffers defeats or mixed results when that same constituency is alienated, then isn't that constituency a bellweather for the party's prospects in any given election?

[theDentist]

Seems our voices are being heard after all.

When I hear a dog barking outside, I can easily ignore it. That's what they're doing. The President may say this isn't a political ploy, but that doesn't make it so. They are doing this for more hispanic votes.

This can cost him the election. Setting fire to your grassroots organizations can quickly overwhelm you.

[Bikers4Bush]

Hypocrisy? Do you mean like campaigning as a conservative and then acting like a moderate liberal is that the kind of blatant hypocrisy you're referring to?

Funny that you can only focus on the one thing that isn't the issue.

It's telling.

[hchutch]

The only thing I'm focusing on are a bunch of ideologial purists who would rather cut off their nose to spite their face and who seem to have no problem attacking those who dare to point out the likely consequences of their actions.

So, Bikers4Kerry, who appointed you the arbiter of who is and is not conservative. And why should folks here listen to those who would rather see John Kerry in the White House over George W. Bush?

I find your yelping every time such a thing is pointed out to be quite telling.

[skeeter]

JMO, Kristinn this problem is much more complicated and will not be solved with simplistic hyperbole.

Really? So tell me why in the hell do you keep popping up on these threads with your goofy 'how do you propose to pay for the deportation of 8 million illegals' question, in spite of the fact its been slam dunked over & over

...and over and over

again?

[Sabertooth]

"Bikers4Kerry"

While you may find it taxing to elevate your game above screenname plays on words, hchutch, you may want to reconsider the wisdom of it in light of the last three letters of yours.

Quit being childish.

[NittanyLion]

No Constitutional issues, no concern over the size of government, no letters voicing your disagreement, no visits to your Congressional representation, just votes.

I am NOT a member of the Constitutional Party. Sorry.

I don't understand your reply. Is it your contention that only Constitution Party members need concern themselves with these issues?

[NittanyLion]

That's not a nazi reference. Porgorom goes back to the Russians expelling the Jews.

I'm aware of that. I was referring to the FreeRepublic tenet "The first to claim the other's a Nazi loses the debate". Your comment fits the bill.

[ZULU]

REMEMBER ALL - WRITE IN TANCREDO IN THE PRIMARY, then work like Hell to get George Bush II re-elected. This is going to be a rough election, and the DemonRats and their Orcs in the media are pulling out all the stops to "avenge" Florida.

A Democratic victory in 2004 can not be tolerated. They will destroy all the months and years of planning, blood, and money expended in beating up on Muslim terrorism.

Further, the Repubs MUST have enough votes in the Senate to get conservative judges approved. The leftist "judges" put on the becnh by the Democrats are not judges - they are public enemies. Instead of applying the laws enacted by the legislature, they are enacting their own laws, and functioning like unelected and unaccountable social workers with law-making powers. And the laws they enact are based on their leitist left wing perspectives, not the Constitution, not Congressional laws, and CERTAINLY not the will of the majority of Americans living and dead.

[upchuck]

Many House critics of the Bush immigration plan said privately that the proposal was created to win Mr. Bush a larger share of the Hispanic vote in November and to mollify Mexican President Vicente Fox. Mr. Fox has supported relaxed U.S. immigration laws as a means to alleviate economic problems in Mexico.

This has to be the ULTIMATE income redistribution scheme.

On another topic, I read nothing about the various stalled judicial nominations. Wonder if they discussed this issue. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE JUDGES!

[NittanyLion]

No, I can point out the blatant hypocrisy, Bikers4Kerry.

I wonder why you think this elevates the conversation? I'm betting you don't appreciate the label "Bushbot" and rightly so. It's offensive and demeaning to you.

What makes you believe what you've said is any different? Are we about childish attacks or substantive conversation on this forum?