Posted on 02/27/2004 1:01:58 AM PST by kattracks
President Bush fired back at his Democratic critics Monday night. After being a sitting duck for the slings and arrows fired at him by the “Hate Bush Brigade”, the White House says the President plans to go on the offensive.
It’s about time. We need to see a tough, straight-talking, Texas-style George Bush hammering away at his detractors. He also needs to reach out to his conservative base and remind them of what’s at stake in this election, because he has a problem with a lot of them.
In recent weeks my conservative listeners have been talking about the same things Kerry and Edwards have been talking about. They’re talking about jobs even though the unemployment rate is only 5.6 percent. They’re talking about outsourcing, they’re talking about amnesty for illegal aliens – these are the things that people who listen to talk radio are concerned about.
Their reaction to the President’s handling of these issues should be a warning sign for the President. Conservatives are calling my show and telling me that they are not going to vote for George Bush because of his stand on amnesty or outsourcing, for example. And this simply amazes me. I ask them if they aren’t going to vote to re-elect George Bush are they going to vote for the Democrat? And the answer is inevitably, "NO! I’m not going to vote for anybody. I’m going to stay home on Election Day."
My reply is if you stay home and George Bush doesn’t win re-election and instead Kerry or whoever the Democrat candidate is gets elected, do you think things are going to get really better? And their answer is, "Well, no, but I want to take a stand."
They should remember Custer. He too took a stand. It was his last.
That just stuns me because it’s utterly irrational. They don’t understand they are taking a stand against themselves. By not voting they only help elect a liberal Democrat who wants to raise their taxes, enact all kinds of new spending programs. They would also endanger the nation by their already demonstrated ineptness and weakness in the war on terror, and hand over Iraq to the United Nations so it can create the same kind of mess we are now seeing in Haiti – another UN and Clinton "success."
They are wearing blinders that only allow them to focus on one issue. They say they won’t vote for a candidate who disagrees with them on one single issue even though he agrees with them on every other issue. It’s utterly self-defeating.
Even though they staunchly support George Bush on his stands on tax cuts, how he is fighting the war, and applaud his pro-life policies, they disagree with him on the amnesty issue, for example, and therefore can’t bring themselves to vote for him.
They’ll just stay home and help elect a Democrat who disagrees with them on just about everything. They’d enact socialist programs that would cripple U.S. industry, yet some of my listeners applaud them not realizing that if you drive a company’s profits down, you drive the value of their stock down and the millions of Americans whose 401Ks are invested in that firm suffer losses as a result.
When President Bush goes on the offensive, he’s going to have to remind Americans that if they want to pay low prices for the goods they need, the reason they are going to have to look overseas is because Democrats in Congress have so regulated American companies that the cost of doing business has risen. That’s due to the unions and government regulations that have become so prohibitive.
What’s the Democrat answer? Well, they say they’d make foreign nations enact the same kind of onerous regulatory and environmental burdens we have here that would force the prices of their goods up to the same level as ours. In other words, wreck their own economies to make John Kerry or some other demagogue look good.
Fat chance.
Mike Reagan, the eldest son of President Ronald Reagan, is heard on more than 200 talk radio stations nationally as part of the Premiere Radio Network.
While you're at it, you might display the ultimate symbol of "conviction to principle" by dowsing yourself in gasoline and light yourself on fire in "protest" for the way government refuses to do things your way no matter how extreme.
Where did I say I was sitting out the election? I'll be writing in my candidate's name and be able to live with myself for the next four years. Not settling.You didn't and I didn't intend to imply that you did. My post was intended to for ... those that say (as this article suggests) that they will sit out the election because they don't like a few things that Bush has or hasn't done [or vote Democrat or 3rd party] ... Sorry if I wasn't clear ...
Wait .... you're writing in someone for the Presidential race ? Holy cow. If enough 'Conservatives' did that and we got Kerry. Oh my ! ;^(
Just fyi, I learned my lesson in 1992. I wasn't too fond of Bush and voted for Perot. The worst thing I have ever done and have regretted it ever since. (We got stuck with clintoon for eight years! You can blame me as partially responsible for that - I have blamed myself already). I won't make that mistake again.
I'm voting Bush and STRAIGHT TICKET GOP. Why ? Because I do NOT WANT Democrats in office.
There is ONLY ONE type of GOOD Democrat - one that has been voted OUT OF POWER !!
And for all you flamers out there itiching to "explaine" to me and others like me that a vote for anyone but George is a vote for the Dems . . . listen up. A vote for the Constitution Party is a message to BOTH Repubs and Dems that the bs is getting WAY out of line.
A vote for the Constitution Party is just that. A vote for the Constitution Party, no one and nothing else.
T L I
I don't care what issues conservatives have with Pres. Bush; one thing all have to acknowledge is that his court nominations have been stellar. If narrow-focused conservatives sit at home this election, or vote for some loser minor party candidate as a "protest," thereby allowing John Kerry to win the Presidency, we can all kiss the conservative movement goodbye
|
|
That IS pretty funny. But I'd still rather see Bush in the White House.
I'll ask again,then what are YOU doing about it besides whining and threats to home or go third party(same difference) ? Until you have something concrete to offer,not much point in further dialogue.
Well the Confederacy was a ,in my opinion,a wash.Really accomplished a lot,dodn't it? Worst loss of life in US history. Bad,bad exmple of standing for "principle" unless that means principled destruction of a complete region of a country. That kind of thinking lead to Japan getting two nuclear wake up calls.
Right on!
A reference:
Judaism’s Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism (and then Christianity) Rejected Homosexuality
______________________________________________________
An Excerpt:
If one can speak of Judaism's essence, it is contained in the Torah statement, “I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse, and you shall choose life.” Judaism affirms whatever enhances life, and it opposes or separates whatever represents death.
Bush may not claim to be pro gun control but he almost broke his wrist signing the extension on the Assault Weapons Ban he signed it so fast
Well I guess Clinton is not responsible for any big tax increases because the Senate & House actually signed them into law.
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.