Posted on 02/07/2004 4:31:25 PM PST by Nix 2
Yep most of the stayed at home in 2000 because Alan lost.
Liar.
I fully expect them to sit at home in 2004. They never change.
Prove it.
Prove to me that the "Alan Keyes" organizations brought out millions of votes for Bush and I will apologize.
Ask Karl Rove, since you are using him as a source.
As for me, I don't have to prove anything. I was there. I was an eyewitness.
You can reject my testimony because of your anti-conservative bigotry, but it won't change the truth of history.
Then you can't back it up. I really doubt that your were an "eyewitness" to Keyes people turning out millions of votes. Keyes sure wasn't helping.
I was his political director. I turned them out myself, along with tens of thousands of the best people in America--'Keyes Republicans'.
Not only did they vote, but they worked their asses off.
Keyes Republicans make up the volunteer base of the Republican Party. But you are too biased and too ignorant of facts on the ground to know that, or to learn it from someone who knows.
I will await your apology, and then I will apologize for the tone of my reponses to you.
Nothing makes me madder than to have these people attacked by ignoramuses...because I know the quality of these folks. They are the backbone, the foundation of this country...there are none finer anywhere on this planet.
If people like you drive them from the GOP, it will be like a body without a soul...DEAD....and the country will have to suffer horribly for that meltdown for many years to recover from it.
I don't hate you or Keyes. I said that 4 million religious conservatives sat out the 2000 race and that group made up the bulk of Keyes' primary support. You said that the Keyes operation, that you headed, got out millions to vote for Bush. If those 4 million that sat at home added to your "millions" then Bush would have had a landslide victory. Something does not add up.
I'm voting for President Bush first of all, because he is an unapologetic Christian. This matters the most to me.
Second is because he has vowed to protect our nation,( not through the UN.) and he supports our military.
Third he proved himself to be a great leader when we were attacked. If (and probably when) we are attacked again, he is the person I want in charge. I think he is doing the best he can for our nation.
The greatest difference that I can see between those here, who support the President and those who don't , comes down to how big of a threat each side views the democ'RATS as.
Those who are not supporting President Bush view the democ'RATS and Pubbies as equally dangerous to the country. They think a dem president would be as good as Bush at prosecuting the WOT, and protecting the country from another attack. The cost of electing a dem is apparently, not that high to them. They think the country can take another hit from a dem presidency,( in spite of the tremendous damage done by the last 8 years of the previous one).
Those who will vote for Bush this year see the exact opposite of this. They(and I) see the democ'RAT party as the biggest threat we face. They (D's) are far and away more dangerous than the pubbies. Kerry has stated he would turn the Iraq war over the UN. He also stated he doesn't deem terrorism that big of a threat. (What more proof do the anti-bush people need?)
The non-Bush supporters think a pubbie controlled House and Senate will somehow reign in a dem president? Did it work with Clinton? Look at all the trouble the dems are making now, as the minority party (judicial nominees exc..) They are NOT going to follow the rules if they gain the presidency.
Look at the Mass. Supreme Court ruling, on gay marriage. The leftist judges pretty much said "gays will be able to marry legally, weather people like or not-we have spoken". Now take that tactic, multiply it by 1,000 and you have what a dem presidency will be like.
I could name many other reasons why I will be voting for GW this fall. The other one that stands out to me is that , if a 'RAT is elected, they will be in charge of the military. I don't want our soldiers to have to serve under a dem, PERIOD. Also, a they will wreck the War in Iraq,( UN) and all the sacrifice's the military made there will mean nothing. The 'RATS complain about it everyday anyway, what do you think they will do if they get the presidency?
I can't stand the demo'rat party. I haven't forgotten the 8 years of Clinton, and I haven't forgotten the absolutely disgraceful way the dems have acted since 9/11. They don't give a flying frisbee about our nation. They want us to be diminished "We have too much power, we scare other nations, that's why we are hated." Remember statements like that? (Personally-I think Clinton and his "World Wide Apologize for the USA" tours during his presidency, played a big part in AlQueda seeing us as weak and thinking we'd crumble under attack)
In any case, there is NO WAY I wouldn't vote for President Bush. I may not agree with him about everything, but that doesn't change my opinion of him as a great leader. He got us through 9/11. Our troops like him. He RESPECTS them and the sacrifices they are asked to make. We are in the middle of a war and still recovering from the biggest attack in our nations history. I'm staying with the team that has gotten us through it . I wouldn't trust a democrat ( the majority of them-with maybe one or 2 exceptions) to clean up after my dogs droppings in the backyard.- Much less elect to give one the power of the presidency.
Just my 2 and 1/2 cents.
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.