Replies

They are wearing blinders that only allow them to focus on one issue.

The person(s) with the blinders on is George Bush and the Republican party.

I have to laugh (bitterly) at the fools who say that we former GW supporters are just focusing on one or two little issues that aren't important.

If I have a job tomorrow whose wages are enough for me to pay my bills, that is damn important to me and my family!

If I keep this job or it goes to a slave labor camp in Red China or a PhD in India that makes 20 grand a year, it matters to me!

If President Bush's amnesty plan goes into effect and my company decides to cut my wages and benefits in half so my job becomes a "job no American wants" and former illegals are brought in to take over, it matters to me!

If my kids have a reason to go to college with the expectation of learning a profession that will ensure a decent, better than average life, that also matters!

The Republican party is so enslaved to big business interests that it is sickening. I'm sure every free traitor, Wall Street hustler and greedy CEO scumball in the country will vote for GW. And apparently that is the one and only interest group that President Bush and the GOP care about.

I have heard many Republicans on this board say that Mr. Bush doesn't need my vote and that is fine with me.

Seeing as how GW won the first time in such a huge landslide, /sarcasm go right ahead GOP, Rove, and GW, keep kicking working white and blue collar people in the nads and you will get what you deserve on election day!

Just tell me one more time how great it is when my middle class job gets outsourced or off-shored so some filthy rich CEO can buy three or four new mansions and I end up as a door greeter at the Great Wall-mart!

Yeah that ought to do it!

At least with a demoRat president the GOP would fight against their one world, socialist, liberal policies, unlike now when their own President leads them by the nose down the same leftest path.

Bush-Bots just don't get it, do they?

What we REAL CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS are trying to do is force President Bush to re-connect with the voter base that got him (and his Dad) elected in the first place. I/we feel abandonded.

REAL CONSERVATIVES do not like to be told "that we have nowhere else to go" in regards to how we vote in this election.

REAL CONSERVATIVES are stubborn and we proudly stand on principal and conviction.

I have voted straight Republican for over 35 years. I worked for President Reagan, both in his Governor and Presidental campaigns.

If we end up with Kerry as a President, then MAYBE that will wake up the future GOP candidates to stand by their promises and not turn a blind eye to the "base" once elected.

Yes, GWB has done a good job on the war on terror and I shutter to think how Gore would have handled it. GWB walked into a large pile of s**t when he took office and we Republicans were looking forward to a breath of fresh air under the leadership of GWB.

My suggestions to the President would be to start standing up to the libs and put some ink in that veto pen. Stop pandering to the leftists, NAFTA, Chicoms, etc. and then you will have our full 100% support, thus easily winning the election.

We're still hoping and praying that he will see the light before it's too late. It boils down to the fact that we're tired of "settling for the lesser of the two evils".

We really do want you in there George! Please remember who got you elected. We want a REAL CONSERVATIVE for a President.

At least with a demoRat president the GOP would fight against their one world, socialist, liberal policies, unlike now when their own President leads them by the nose down the same leftest path.

What do you base this fantasy on?

HEINZ KETCHUP HAS 57 Factories outsourced for ketchup and other HEINZ products. Kerry has many contributors who have off shore, out of country businesses. You haven't been doing your Kerry homework, have you? Kerry will be answering these questions or dodging them once Edwards is out of the contest. Further, when Dukakis was Gov. of Massachusetts, Kerry was LT. Gov. Their administration let CRIMINALS OUT OF JAIL who went on to murder innocent people. FURTHER, KERRY IS AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY EXCEPT FOR TERRORISTS. Terrorist is a term of art imo that can be a living breathing word in the hands of a liberal. Kerry is too soft on criminals - a friend of criminals perhaps?

Not fond of a Dem president, the last one cost me PLENTY, shen some more in donations to the Repubs when George came along. BUT if George is not going to do what the people that hired him are telling him to do, if he does not prioritize the issues in the order of importance indicated by the Republican voters, then there is another party that has a better fit. I'm looking at the Constitution Party.

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

"Just tell me one more time how great it is when my middle class job gets outsourced or off-shored so some filthy rich CEO can buy three or four new mansions and I end up as a door greeter at the Great Wall-mart! "

You think having a dem would help your job problems.

AFL-CIO motto: Kick me again! (Ann Coulter)
Townhall.com ^ | February 26, 2004 | Ann Coulter

In the past decade, the AFL-CIO has lobbied Congress on three major issues of any importance to union members:
Oppose the North American Free Trade Agreement;
Oppose permanent normal trade relations with China;
Support drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
The unions lost every vote. Demonstrating his savvy political skills, the head of the AFL-CIO, John Sweeney, repeatedly throws the federation's support to political candidates who opposed labor on all three issues. So if you ever find yourself negotiating with Sweeney, make sure your opening bid is "nothing."
Sweeney's curious lose-at-any-price strategy has cost the unions everything. The only two Democratic presidential candidates to vote with the unions on any of these issues – not all, but any – were Representatives Dick Gephardt and Dennis Kucinich. Gephardt was out of the race after the first primary, and Kucinich can't break beyond the Aliens-Kidnapped-My-Mother crowd. (Dennis Kucinich did his tax return this week, and under "occupation" he wrote "Jay Leno punch line.")
There is only one candidate for president who didn't vote for NAFTA, didn't vote for trade with China and supported drilling in ANWR. That candidate is George Bush. He got into office by beating Al Gore – the guy who was the head cheerleader for NAFTA. And unlike Dick Gephardt, Bush spends more time on the phone with Jimmy Hoffa than with Barbra Streisand. As president, Bush enraged free traders – and our precious European "allies" – by imposing tariffs on steel imports.
Sweeney has rewarded Bush by calling him a "horror" for organized labor. Apparently what "organized labor" really wants isn't good jobs at good wages, but ... abortion on demand! The AFL-CIO has vowed to devote massive union resources against Bush in the crucial swing states of Missouri, Ohio and Florida in the coming election.
Strictly following his strategy of selling union votes for nothing, the AFL-CIO has endorsed Sen. John Kerry – who voted for NAFTA, voted for trade with China and voted against drilling for oil in Alaska. Skilled laborers will have to wait another day for "fair trade" and high-paying jobs in Alaska, but at least Sweeney's candidate supports the issues that really matter to the average blue-collar worker: gay marriage, global-warming treaties and hybrid cars.
Kerry denounces "Benedict Arnold" CEOs who ship "American jobs overseas." (Experts are still trying to figure out why Kerry didn't mention his service in Vietnam in that statement.) Sweeney seems to be satisfied with Kerry's explanation that – like his vote for war with Iraq – he voted for free trade, but then was shocked when free trade resulted.
Sen. John Edwards calls protection of U.S. jobs "a moral issue." Reminding audiences that he is the son of a mill worker almost as often as Kerry mentions that he served in Vietnam, Edwards says that "when we talk about trade, we are talking about values." As the son of a mill worker, he has seen with his "own eyes" what bad trade agreements "do to people." Of the evil trade agreements (supported by AFL-CIO's candidate) Edwards says: "Those trade deals were wrong. They cost us too many jobs and lowered our standards."
Except – like Kerry – Edwards also voted for those trade agreements every chance he got. In 2000, Edwards voted for trade with China. Having seen with his "own eyes" what happens "when the mill shuts down," Edwards voted to shut down a few more mills. Edwards also voted his conscience to oppose drilling in Alaska. Whenever Edwards' conscience speaks to him, it sounds remarkably like Barbra Streisand.
Edwards' only fig leaf for claiming he backs labor is a hypothetical vote he never actually cast. He bravely claims he would have voted against NAFTA – if only he had been in the Senate when it came up for a vote.
That's an interesting moral calculus. Edwards didn't mind forcing American workers to compete with a billion Chinese – famously including child workers and slave laborers. But trade with Canada and Mexico he says would have offended his delicate moral sensibilities.
In his stump speech, Edwards implies he ran against Jesse Helms by saying he beat "the Jesse Helms machine" to win his Senate seat. It was a real David and Goliath match-up – pitting a poor, beleaguered multimillionaire trial lawyer against an elderly senator of humble means. But the mere mention of Helms' name invariably elicits sneers from the party of the little guy.
Helms voted with the AFL-CIO on all three big labor issues – against NAFTA, against trade with China and for half a million good jobs in Alaska. Indeed, Helms was one of the main lobbyists against trade with China. The guy Edwards actually beat, Lauch Faircloth, was in the Senate for only one of these votes. The AFL-CIO didn't have to take Faircloth's word on how he might have voted on NAFTA: He voted against it. The AFL-CIO endorsed Edwards and opposed Faircloth and Helms.
It's not particularly surprising that the party of trial lawyers, environmentalists and Hollywood actresses keeps voting against blue-collar workers. What's strange is that the AFL-CIO keeps voting against blue-collar workers, too!

Sorry for reposting the whole article

Gridlock CAN be a great thing!