Posted on 10/11/2004 1:18:40 PM PDT by treowth
"A lot of Reagan conservatives are threatening to cut off their noses to spite their faces. They think that because President Bush hasn't done every single thing they want, or has done some things they didn't want, they should punish him by staying home on Election Day or voting for some third party candidate who hasn't got a chance to win in November. It should be obvious to them that they will therefore help elect the Kerry-Edwards team that will do nothing they want and everything they don't. Somehow this idiocy seems to make sense to them -- dump a conservative president for a pair of socialists who, given four years in the White House, will wreck this country's economy and in the process probably lose the War on Terrorism, as well. What bothers me is the insistence of these dissident conservatives that they are devoted to the legacy of Ronald Reagan, who understood the truth of the old adage, 'Politics is the art of the possible.' In other words, you get what you can and wait for a chance to get the rest. These people think that if they don't get everything they want they are willing to accept nothing, but that's not what my father stood for. My father would say, 'If I can get 80 percent, or 60 percent, or 50 percent of what I'm looking for, I'll take that and I'll go back later on for the rest of it'."
--Michael Reagan
What about those conservatives who voice criticism of some specific Bush policies? Do you see that as being equivalent to bluntly declaring "XYZ isn't voting for Bush because of ABC?"
You can probably slide by this time, but just don't "BTTT" or you'll really be in for it. Consider it a little friendly advice.
By the way, welcome!
I just finished reading Bork's "Coercing Virtue."
The appointment of SCOTUS judges is my number one concern after the WOT. If Kerry gets in and two or three judges resign, the judicial activists that Kerry is sure to appoint would deliver a wound to this country that we may never recover from.
The unconstitutional CFR may have restricted political parties somewhat, but it actually opened up a whole new ballgame to grassroots free speech. Soros, moveon.org, SwiftBoatVets are just examples. Free speech knows no bounds. No matter how hard the McCainiacs of the world try, they will never succeed in shutting down political free speech.
There ARE no conservatives NOT voting for Bush.. They may be radicals of some stripe but their not conservatives.. Allowing Kerry to win this election is a radical move and left wing radical at that.. Ron Reagan is a left wing dupe, single issue flunky..
There are plenty of single issue folks around here as well.
We all criticize specific Bush policies to some extent. The vast majority of FReepers and I suspect of conservatives in general were dismayed and highly critical of CFR, the deal with Kennedy, the prescription drug expansion, the perceived weakness on the AWB renewal, the lack of attention to the borders, etc, etc, etc. But I also know that 95% or better of us are going to vote for him anyway. The alternative is unthinkable.
And your mother dresses you funny...Most of us Buchananites voted for Bush the last time...In fact, if it wasn't for Buchananites, Bush would have lost...So bite your tongue...
It is a pleasure getting a response from you, sir. Agreed -free speech does acknowlege no bounds (neither does money in politics). I hope it is a pleasant fall day in Fresno. I grew up down the road in Coalinga, so I know that October and April are the best months in the Valley;)
Nope...You wasted your vote on Bush Sr...YOU gave us Clinton...Face it...
Thanks for the welcome.
But I still don't get what "Bump"means.
Anybody out there who can help?
Thanks... but I still don't get it!
(sigh)
I will read, observe , and learn.....
humbly...
Let's go over it again. :-)
When someone posts a message, it moves the thread to the top of the latest posts. Therefore, when someone shows up and simply says "bump", that is what they are intended to do--bump the thread to the top.
If you see "bttt", it is the same thing (short for "back to the top.")
Yeah but most all are voting for Bush even if libertarian..
Good article.
Yes they should, because Bush had to settle for less than he wanted in the first tax cut .. but with the success of the first tax cut .. we now have a second tax cut.
I know a lot of people were unhappy because we didn't get it all the first time and called the repubs spineless for not getting it done.
So does the person that says "bump" actually bump the article to the top????
(sorry for sounding like a technovirgin)...
Don't forget the Keyes folk.
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.