Posted on 01/01/2006 12:32:44 PM PST by ncountylee
CRAWFORD, Texas — For six days, President Bush has stayed in nearly complete isolation on his ranch here — just mountain-biking and brush-clearing, the White House insisted daily, and seeing only one visitor, his mother-in-law, Jenna Welch. He never even ventured into this little town of 600, not even to the cheeseburger joint that he often uses as a political tool to show that he is in touch with his neighbors.
But on New Year's Day, after a brief stop at an Army hospital in San Antonio to visit wounded soldiers, Bush is scheduled to return to the White House earlier than usual from his break and start a campaign to set the tone for 2006 and, perhaps, the remainder of his presidency.
As part of an ambitious strategy the White House has mapped out for the next four weeks, Bush has scheduled two major speeches — one on the economy on Friday in Chicago, another on Iraq — ahead of the State of the Union address, which is tentatively scheduled for Jan. 31. By the time he appears before Congress, Bush's aides are hoping, two of the immediate challenges the president faces — the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. and the permanent renewal of the Patriot Act — will be behind him.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesargus.com ...
I suppose you missed the chapter on "overrides," huh?
It's beginning to look like a death match, isn't it?
At least she believes in SOMETHING, rather than being AGAINST everything.
The vacuousness of your responses is proven by the PERSONAL attacks you made on these two Freepers.
But that's not big news around here.
Sometimes I think that IS the agenda with some of these people. You know, the purists.
I don't give one rat's a$$ what you say about George Bush; nothing the likes of you can say about him makes one bit of difference to anybody with a brain; you passed relevancy concerning getting people elected to office years ago.
More whining from an offended Bush fan. LOL
Oh give it a rest, Reagan Man. Others have just as much right to free expression as you do. You wrote in a post above:
Opportunities to advance a more conservative agenda for America have been tossed away in favor of more spending on social welfare and entitlement programs, expansion of the federal bureaucracy and total opposition to real immigration reform. Those are the facts and that is the truth. Obviosuly, you can't handle the truth.
Those are not facts, those are your opinions. For every specific policy you can trot out to complain about, others can -- and do -- take a different opinion about the same policy.
No. You and your pack of whining Bush cheerleaders give it a rest. I offered a political position based on the facts and only the facts. If people want to take a position not consistent with the conservative agenda, have at it. Just don't think you're fooling anyone into believing you're a conservative.
Oh my. David Sanger must be one miserable human being to be around. I almost feel sorry for him.
| Defense | International | Domestic | Total | |||||
|
|
||||||||
| 1962 | 9.3 | 1.0 | 2.5 | 12.7 | ||||
| 1963 | 9.0 | 0.9 | 2.7 | 12.6 | ||||
| 1964 | 8.6 | 0.7 | 3.0 | 12.3 | ||||
| 1965 | 7.4 | 0.7 | 3.2 | 11.3 | ||||
| 1966 | 7.8 | 0.7 | 3.5 | 11.9 | ||||
| 1967 | 8.9 | 0.7 | 3.6 | 13.1 | ||||
| 1968 | 9.5 | 0.6 | 3.6 | 13.6 | ||||
| 1969 | 8.7 | 0.4 | 3.2 | 12.4 | ||||
| 1970 | 8.1 | 0.4 | 3.4 | 11.9 | ||||
| 1971 | 7.3 | 0.3 | 3.7 | 11.3 | ||||
| 1972 | 6.7 | 0.4 | 3.8 | 10.9 | ||||
| 1973 | 5.9 | 0.4 | 3.7 | 9.9 | ||||
| 1974 | 5.6 | 0.4 | 3.6 | 9.6 | ||||
| 1975 | 5.6 | 0.5 | 4.0 | 10.1 | ||||
| 1976 | 5.2 | 0.4 | 4.5 | 10.1 | ||||
| 1977 | 4.9 | 0.4 | 4.6 | 10.0 | ||||
| 1978 | 4.7 | 0.4 | 4.8 | 9.9 | ||||
| 1979 | 4.7 | 0.4 | 4.6 | 9.6 | ||||
| 1980 | 4.9 | 0.5 | 4.7 | 10.1 | ||||
| 1981 | 5.2 | 0.4 | 4.5 | 10.1 | ||||
| 1982 | 5.8 | 0.4 | 3.9 | 10.1 | ||||
| 1983 | 6.1 | 0.4 | 3.8 | 10.3 | ||||
| 1984 | 5.9 | 0.4 | 3.5 | 9.9 | ||||
| 1985 | 6.1 | 0.4 | 3.5 | 10.0 | ||||
| 1986 | 6.2 | 0.4 | 3.3 | 10.0 | ||||
| 1987 | 6.1 | 0.3 | 3.1 | 9.5 | ||||
| 1988 | 5.8 | 0.3 | 3.1 | 9.3 | ||||
| 1989 | 5.6 | 0.3 | 3.1 | 9.1 | ||||
| 1990 | 5.2 | 0.3 | 3.2 | 8.7 | ||||
| 1991 | 5.4 | 0.3 | 3.3 | 9.0 | ||||
| 1992 | 4.8 | 0.3 | 3.4 | 8.6 | ||||
| 1993 | 4.4 | 0.3 | 3.4 | 8.2 | ||||
| 1994 | 4.1 | 0.3 | 3.4 | 7.8 | ||||
| 1995 | 3.7 | 0.3 | 3.4 | 7.4 | ||||
| 1996 | 3.5 | 0.2 | 3.2 | 6.9 | ||||
| 1997 | 3.3 | 0.2 | 3.1 | 6.7 | ||||
| 1998 | 3.1 | 0.2 | 3.1 | 6.4 | ||||
| 1999 | 3.0 | 0.2 | 3.0 | 6.3 | ||||
| 2000 | 3.0 | 0.2 | 3.1 | 6.3 | ||||
| 2001 | 3.0 | 0.2 | 3.2 | 6.5 | ||||
| 2002 | 3.4 | 0.3 | 3.5 | 7.1 | ||||
| 2003 | 3.7 | 0.3 | 3.6 | 7.6 | ||||
| 2004 | 3.9 | 0.3 | 3.5 | 7.7 | ||||
|
Source: Congressional Budget Office. |
||||||||
Nice. I see polite discourse is not one of your strengths.
I offered a political position based on the facts and only the facts.
No sir. You expressed your opinions. Period.
Just don't think you're fooling anyone into believing you're a conservative.
After having read who knows how many hundreds of opinions on FR over the years, the one thing I know for certain. There are almost more varieties of "conservative" than there are of cultivated roses. I've learned, as well, that demagogues who run out of all other arguments ALWAYS restort in the end to crying that their opponent is not a "real" conservative.
Bump-a-roo-ski.
You posted this to MNJohnnie:
If there is anyone on Free Republic who exhibits a proclivity for ignorance and arrogance, its you, mister status quo centrist.
It's simply amazing how you go out of your way on thread after thread, making endless excuses for this President on issues where he has clearly made the wrong policy decision. The fact you have no problem with a so called conservative GOP POTUS who spends like a liberal, expands government like a Democrat and turns a blind eye to an open borders policy like a good libertarian, says as much about you, as it does about GW Bush.
If you dare to listen to the truth, instead of posting the same juvenile diatribes on a routine basis, you just may learn something. Somehow, I don't think its possible, but miracles do happen from time to time.
Instead of making excuses for PresBush and denounce conservatives for speaking out, try taking a course in political science and getting yourself informed. Right now you're one of the most uninformed individuals posting on this forum.
If you want to be known as a Bush cheerleader, fine. Just don't expect to ever be taken seriously by this FReeper. When you can debate the issues, instead of offering up foolish drivel, look me up. Until then, have fun spinning your web of lies and distortions.
Some of your post to ohioWfan:
I know you love GW Bush more then life itself, but we live in the United States of America. ...(My civil rights whine)....
You really need to get a grip on yourself. Bush is no saint and he's not perfect. Bad policy decisions have been made by this President and the GOP controlled Congress.
If anyone engages in histrionics on FR, its you, ohioW(hining)fan. A look at your last post proves you're not interested in engaging in any rational, logical debate. You sit around waiting for anyone to offer up criticism of your sainted GW Bush. Then like a jack-in-the-box, you pop up and lash out at the nearest offender. LOL
To me:
You're acting like a baffoon. First you say, "Then you have the audacity to criticize others for opposing you". I did nothing of the sort. You brought Reagan into the debate. Not me. I simply defended my right to exercise my 1ST amendment rights. Period. You change the subject to include Reagan, in order to attack me for criticizing Bush's liberal policy agenda. And I'm being audacious? WOW Again, the thread is about PresBush. No one else. Your efforts to obfuscate the issue of the thread are noted.
The following have a hint of something to discuss so I will try, foolishly:
Fact. PresBush is the leader of the GOP. Fact. The GOP has a governing majority that controls Congress.
Governing majority?? Questionable. The Republicans have a majority but aren't always in agreement.
Fact. The House controls the purse strings. Fact. PresBush hasn't used his veto power once since taking office. Fact. PresBush has expanded the federal bureaucracy like no POTUS since LBJ. Fact. PresBush has spent the taxpayers money like no POTUS in US history.
Which is it, the House controls the purse strings or President Bush does?
Fact. Not once in five years has PresBush properly addressed the immigration problems of open borders and illegal migration into the US from Mexico.
He has made proposals, you just don't like them. There will have to be a guest worker program one way or the other, good or bad. Live with it. We may end up with a wall but that has draw backs, too. Regardless, he is fighting the Democrats and the media because they like the situation just as it is. He can't just snap his fingers and make it happen.
Opportunities to advance a more conservative agenda for America have been tossed away in favor of more spending on social welfare and entitlement programs, expansion of the federal bureaucracy and total opposition to real immigration reform. Those are the facts and that is the truth. Obviosuly, you can't handle the truth.
How about tax cuts? Is that conservative? How about not only touching the "third rail of politics", Social security, but grabbing it with both hands and trying to change it with partial privatization? Is that conservative? How about changing the education bill to bring accountability to the NEA? Is that conservative? How about rehabilitating and re-energizing our military? What about taking the fight to the terrorists? Conservative? Is that conservative? How about Roberts and Alito? Conservative? How about putting the Katrina aid money in the hands of private contractors rather than expanding government bureaucracy? Conservative? How about defending his faith in God? Conservative? How about standing up to the left on the Patriot Act? Conservative? How about attempting tax reform? Conservative?
I know I am forgetting a zillion things because there are many more. Is Bush conservative? Look at the record. He just doesn't ballyhoo his programs as conservative because that would wake up the left as he slips most of these things past them. Is he a dogmatic conservative? No. He is a do-what-works and get-what-we-can conservative.
If you must know. Kristol's remarks reached a set of conclusions about what should be Bush`s policy for the next year and they sound rational and logical to me. But they have very little to do with advancing a conservative governing agenda of fiscal responsibility. That was my point. I used Kristol's remarks as a segue to criticizing PresBush`s status quo policy agenda of more liberal spending, bigger government bureaucracy and a continued open border policy that endangers America's security.
Which is another illustration that you missed the mark. You hurt conservatives more than you help. We would be better off if you were a Democrat, or at least openly a Democrat.
>>>>Is this some of the facts you keep espousing?
No. I don't use CBO figures. I use OMB figures.
>>>>Now I'm really curious as to where you got the idea that President Bush was a ultra fiscal conservative?
I never called PresBush ultra conservative. I always considered him a traditional conservative. After five years of his liberal spending habits, expanding governemnt and ignoring the immigration issue, I don't consider him conservative on those issue.
>>>>Did you not know anything at all about him?
Sure do and you know it.
Reagan Man, just FYI, deport's post is an example of facts vs. opinions.
Not one of your strengths either, or your buddies in the Bush Attack Pack.
>>>>I've learned, as well, that demagogues who run out of all other arguments ALWAYS restort in the end to crying that their opponent is not a "real" conservative.
And I've learned, that when people move the conservative bar further and further to the left, so as to fit their agenda, they're usually nothing but liberal Republicans, RINO`s or status quo centrists.
The NYTimes hates GWB and he is kicking the old grey lady's ass ~ Bump!
Okay. Now we know you can cut and paste my posts, just not the posts of the people I'm debating. Little one sided. LOL And we know you relish the idea of defending PresBush whenever the opportunity arises. I do too. I enjoy defending the President when he's right. NOT WHEN HE'S WRONG!
Hey the gang loves to see one implode once in a while....
Well if you don't want an ultra conservative what do you want?..... My point is you apparently knew nothing of President Bush prior to his being elected....
OMB.... aren't they prediciting reductions as a percent of GDP?.... What does OMB show comparing the last 50 years or so of discretionary dollars to GDP?
Wasn't Reagan a man for open borders or eliminating them?.... seems I read that somewhere.
Now you you have a good one
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.