Replies

I voted for Bush for two reasons.

1) After decades of indifference to Islamist terrorists he has been the only President to take action against them.

2) I view the appointment of conservative judges to the Federal bench and the Supreme Court to be of paramount importance.

While I do not agree with many of the actions President Bush has taken, I certainly do not share your view that these constitute "specific and egregious attacks against our own citizens".

Please go back and reread my previous post in which I made reference of what would happen if the "likes" of Donald Sutherland ran things - a reference not just to actors but to left wing Marxists like Hillary Clinton.

I voted for him for the same reasons you list as well as tax cuts and reigning in an activist judiciary we have suffered with now for years. INMO we need a 'none of the above' box to check. No, no Marxists, and no, not a globalist either.

I do consider CFR an egregious attack on our citizens right to free political speech. GW knew it at the time he signed it, but 'counted' on the USSC to overturn it. That is a direct attack on our constitutional rights, as with the Kelo ruling on Eminent Domain. A President that does not protect the constitution is well, not honoring his full oath of office to do so. The border issue is also spoken to in the constitution and he has outright failed to address the issue, in fact supports an open border society. The jobs spoken of by the press fail to reflect what percentage of those jobs are held by illegals. Anyway wingman, I doubt we are very far apart on many issues, but I do call it as I see it. I hope a true American candidate emerges for 2008.. but I fully believe the pubs will lose power in 2006, they have for sure, lost my support, donations, and respect. The Dems never had it to begin with. If the Marxists do win, it will be because the GOP let it happen. They must lead, not bend over. JMHO>