Posted on 09/22/2005 8:17:13 AM PDT by new yorker 77
You were willing to back Pence the other day when you thought he was a lone wolf. Are you yet willling to retract your dismissal of the President?
Except that he has no Constitutional ground to ask for that money in the first place
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."--James Madison
"I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and the duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit."--Grover Cleveland
Of course I expect Karl Rove and George Bush know more about the Constitution than those two men, one of whom wrote the Constitution, right?
What I object to is the hyperbole about spending that is not accurate. And I object to the hyperbole being stated without mention of the attacks on 9/11 and the subsequent war on terror that have required great resources to handle correctly and firmly.
Oh yes, it can't be told to us how often billions for rebuilding, billions for roads, billions for healthcare, and billions for education are so closely tied to 9/11. I truly hope one day at least one Republican would have the fortitude to stand up and admit the waste they have foisted upon the citizens of the respective states. I doubt they will but heck one could hope..
And what I object to more, is the complete overlooking of the hundreds of conservative things he has done in his less than 5 years in office
$28 billion for education
$700 billion (and growing) for healthcare
$300 billion for roads
$200 billion for Katrina
uncountless billions for the 'little ones' we don't hear about.
I'm a bit more concerned with the trillions of dollars 'conservatives' have spent rather than the errant quote Bush has bothered to throw towards conservatives every now and again
I repeat to you what I have said before. IF Ronald Reagan had been President now, he would have responded the same way in spending and size of government, and the short sighted far rightists who assaulted him then (but worship him now), would be assaulting him now.
LOL, oh yes, I just know that Reagan, who advocated dismissing the whole department of Education would have wasted money this way. If that's the case why vote for another Republican again? Because they'll put us all in the poor house slower than Democrats? That's a hell of a campaign slogan there.
Bush's 'legacy' will be that he saved this nation from an evil enemy, that he restored a failing economy and in spite of extreme blows to it, has it roaring and back in gear (due to TAX CUTS and FISCAL CONSERVATISM), and was one of the most ethical men to ever occupy the Oval Office.
WHAT fiscal conservatism?!? Spending more than Democrats could ever hope for is fiscal conservatism? Seems more pandering for votes to me
I guess you haven't read what HE had to say about that. I trust him more than anyone else on the subject, and he disagrees with you.
Let me state again, that I am in agreement with the overspending, and the failure at least at some level to shrink government (I'm not talking about increasing gov't for the sake of security), but I agree with the author of this article, that President has long term goals that are conservative, and that everything he has done is heading toward those goals.
And history will judge him accordingly.
You......like the Democrats......need to be aware that he isn't running again, ergo, he cannot be 'pandering' for votes.
I wish he could, but alas, he can't.
No but the worthless representation in Congress that passes this crap before he signs it is running. He's the frontman for a team of scam artists and con men, just as a Democratic politician is for his 'team'. The Republican party looks good (i.e. keeps promising programs and monetary waste) in the eyes of the people, they'll keep getting votes at all levels unfortunately
I wish he could, but alas, he can't.
The hero worship of a political hack (that's what all politicians today are when it comes down to it is amazing) is absolutely amazing.
Exactly.
And what I object to more, is the complete overlooking of the hundreds of conservative things he has done in his less than 5 years in office.
Amen.
When you talk about the 'size and scope of government' if you don't factor in 9/11, you are being misrepresenting the facts.
Preach it!
I never saw Pence as a lone wolf. Tancredo, Graham, Paul and others have spoken out for fiscal sanity when it comes to Katrina relief. The President has said from the beginning, we will spend what it takes, but we will make sure the money is spent wisely. Sounds like good rhetoric. After over 4 years in office and no effort to reduce govt spending and limit the size and scope of govt, I don't have much confidence in Bush being fiscally responsible.
You only agree with something when it helps Bush. If your referring to Reagan's remarks when he was governor of California, about some far right hardline conservatives opposing his agenda, I wouldn't call that a blanket statement for his entire political career. I lived through the 1980`s. Reagan wasn't routinely attacked from the left, not from the right.
"Government does not solve problems. It subsidizes them."
"Government is the problem, not the solution."
-- Ronald Reagan
Reagan wasn't routinely attacked from the left, not from the right.
So, when the actions of Pence and others in Congress are a direct result of the President's request, Pence is fiscally conservative but Bush is not? Do I have that right?
It is ridiculous to think the War on Terror will be over by the time he leaves Office....
Sorry if I have faith in God and His answers to the prayers of millions of people who are praying for this President, not only for his election twice, but for God to guide him every single day (as Scripture commands us to do). He will not always be right, but he is being faithful to God's call for him and for this nation.
We'll never agree on this.......you see corruption everywhere, and I see hope....... so perhaps it's best not to discuss it.
Quite possibly. When one is hysterically sarcastic, it's not always possible to tell where the sarcasm ends.
It's not clear how adopting and implementing the opposing party's socialist agenda can be see as an effective strategy.
Thank you, ma'am!
Pence has been outspoken about the feds having more fiscal restraint on spending. I have no reason to doubt Bush said that to Pence, but with Bush`s bad track record on spending, actions speak louder then words. IOW. When I see it, I'll believe it. Hastert and Delay have voiced opposition to Pence and others who want to seriously cut back govt expenditures.
I think you're right. The WOT will be with us for a long long time. How long did the crusades last? 300 years?
The War on Terror as we know it probably will be though. Not that we will be able to claim victory, but the American public will tire of it and politicians will not emphasize it.
This, of course, assumes that the US is not the victim of another terrorist attack. If an attack does occur and the attackers were illegal immigrants, it will probably spell the end of Bush's version of the War on Terror.
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.