[lilylangtree]

I searched but couldn't locate a duplicate. Lileks wrote a good commentary. Even if we conservatives don't agree 100% with the president, we still need to support him on November 2 with our votes. The alternative (shudder) is to have a liberal leftist demonRAT with communist allegiance as president. I, for one, never want to see that happen because America will be in deep doo doo if it does occur.

[Democrap]

Which candidate does our enemy want to lose? George W. Bush.

This should be the message for the next 8 months.

[BCrago66]

Bad link.

[BfloGuy]

Looks like a good essay. Sure wish I had a link that worked.

[quidnunc]

Same op/ed with a different headline here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1076706/posts

[Spunky]

CyberCowboy would you use your Washington ping list please?

This is a good commentary by a Spokesman Review writer.

[Theresawithanh]

Exactly! Vote to re-elect President Bush!

I've gotten in a few reply wars with posters on other threads who say they won't vote for President Bush, they'll just stay home, or they'll do a write-in vote for the candidate they believe best represents them, but we can't afford to let this happen!

[lake5732]

"Bush is serious about the war. The Democrats are serious about the war against Bush.

Lilecks nails it. Now how do we shorten this up and get it on a bumper sticker?

[thoughtomator]

Or you could vote for Ralph Nader, and make an investment in future GOP campaigns instead.

[Once-Ler]

An excellent article. Thank you for posting it.

[tkathy]

Terrific article. The dems are in a war against Bush. They have no interest whatsoever in the war against those who would kill us and destroy this wonderful country.

[dpwiener]

The actual Reagan may have issued an amnesty for illegals, but the Ideal Reagan would have done no such thing. ... The Ideal Reagan would have eliminated the National Endowment for the Arts; the actual Reagan proposed a $1 million increase in his final budget.

Much as I love Lileks, these are straw man arguments. The problem with Bush isn't a proposed amnesty (which will never pass anyway) nor even a piddling few millions for the NEA. The problem is a $540 billion Medicare prescription entitlement and a humongous farm subsidy bill and an enormous education subsidy bill, etc., etc., all of which have ballooned the federal budget and the federal deficit by amounts which make Democrats look like penny-pinchers.

There's no excuse for such extravagance, not when Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House. The War on Terror is no excuse for repeated annual double-digit jumps in domestic spending.

The sad reality is that electing a Democratic President will probably cut the annual deficit and cut the rate of increase of federal spending, if for no other reason than the fact that divided government will create some well-needed gridlock. The other sad reality is that the best form of gridlock is a Democratic President and a Republican Congress. A Republican President (e.g., Reagan), when dealing with a mostly Democratic Congress, will still tend to allow spending and deficits to grow substantially.

[3catsanadog]

I'm sticking with Republicans - presidents, senators, representatives. Locally and nationally and every other way and shape I can. I'm scratching my head on some things Bush has pushed but overall he's better than any Democrat. I liked him in 2000 and I like him even better now.

I still believe that if the GOP gains more seats in Congress, Bush will push for more conservative ideals. The Democrats still think they are in charge and a bigger GOP majority will block their stonewalling.

[Defender2]

Good Post!:-)

[clee1]

For this reason, and this one alone, I will go into the booth in November and pull the lever for Gee Dubya. (We use a test-grading-scanner type of ballot in Bartow County, GA; but that's beside the point.) I was going to write in "Mickey Mouse", but I don't think I will have that luxury.

He (the President) has peed me off royally with his excessive spending and amnesty plans, but we just CANNOT take the risk that the appease-every-raghead-and/or-Eurotrash DemonRats will win. On the most important issue facing our Nation, Bush is the only person running that has an acceptable policy. Period.

[Libertina]

When I feel angry with my president's decisions, this is a good one to read.

[LadyDoc]

bump

Lileks says it all

[jocon307]

"Skull and Bones! Plastic turkey!"

LOL, I want to hear Gore yelling this in his "arr-matey pirate voice". Cracks me up.

I'm telling you folks, as irritated as any of us may be at anything Bush has done (or failed to do), the dems would be worse, far worse.

If the American public is so addled that it hands the reins of power to Kerry, Hillary, Edwards, whoever, we're done for.

As punishment for Bill Clinton's failures to fight against the Islamofacists for 8 years the dems must not regain the white house for another generation. We've got that party on the ropes, or darn close to it, and we need to keep slugging until they go down for the count.

[memaw]

The enemy want be happy with me cause I intend to vote for President Bush & not traitor Kerry......

[section9]

James Lileks nails it!

Some "real conservatives" need to get a clue, buy a vowel, or both.

The enemy of our enemy is our President. Perfect!

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Mr. Mojo]

The North Koreans would love to see John Kerry win the election. The mullahs of Iran would love it. The Syrian Ba'athists would sigh with relief. Every enemy of America......

Let's not forget the French.