Posted on 05/06/2006 3:26:58 PM PDT by RWR8189
Yea, Bush is really tough on immigration and borders!
Tax increases. Amnesty for illegals. Refusing to stand up to terrorists after 240 Marines were murdered by Hezbollah. A woman on the Supreme Court, no matter how squishy.
Sandra Day O'Connor for one...
Reagan raised taxes, Bush has not.
Reagan was cowed by terrorists, Bush is not.
Reagan granted amnesty to illegals, Bush has not.
Reagan nominated two liberals to the Supreme Court, Bush has not.
Who is conservative, again?
Fred's a beltway bonehead. I vote for term limits not only for politicians but pundits as well.
Here's what I think it all boils down to, folks:
The Democrats are the enemy. The Republicans are the good guys, but they often don't fight hard enough. So what are you going to do? Are you going to punish the Republicans for their weakness by making them even weaker? Are you going to punish them by putting the Democrats in charge? Now, that would be a brilliant move, eh?
Folks, has it occurred to you the Republicans might just show a bit more backbone if they get more votes. Imagine what they could do if they had 60 Senators. If they get fewer votes, they will just cave in even faster. You really need to know that.
You may not like everything the Republicans do, but if you think they are as bad as the Democrats, you have a hard lesson to learn. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.
Very true, very true.
Very true, very true.
Lets talk about Reagan vs. Bush. The easiest way is to name those things that Reagan accomplished that Bush hasn’t.
Reagan signed the first handgun control bill in California history; Bush has signed no anti-gun laws in his political career.
Reagan signed the first Gay-rights legislation in California; Bush has never signed any gay rights legislation.
Reagan broke his promise never to raise taxes with his “revenue enhancement” programs along with the largest FICA increase in history. Bush hasn’t raised taxes in any way .
Reagan cut and run in Lebanon after the first taking of casualties. Bush has stayed the course and held to his promise not to back down.
Reagan appointed 3 liberals and one conservative to the Supreme Court. Bush hass appointed 2 Conservatives and numerous lower court Conservatives.
Reagan talked a good game on abortion but Bush pushed for and got the late term abortion ban passed.
Reagan left office and immediately endorsed the Brady Bill in his first public appearance as an ex-president.
The myth of Reagan is exactly that. A myth. He was a great president because he could say the right things at the right time to make the country feel better. It is beyond dispute that Reagan beats Bush hands down when it comes to communication BUT Bush beats Reagan in every conservative category anyone cares to offer.
Oh, for Heaven's sake, it's time to grow up and face reality. We were told for years that if we would just give them a majority, we would be amazed at what they would do. Well, we are amazed, but not in a good way. And, if we bust our butts and give them 60 Senators, then we'll just be dealing with a "Gang of Nineteen" instead of a "Gang of Fourteen".
I think people who hire illegals to cook, provide maid service, etc are completely oblivious to the border problem ...
Excellent points. After all that, Bush doesn't seem so bad after all.
I agree with others that Bush has done many things wrong, and some of them major, but the key is to keep things in perspective. I say go ahead and criticize him, but please don't even imagine in your wildest dreams that he is anywhere near as bad as Gore or Kerry would have been.
You can't push ANY agenda if you CAN'T win an election.
Those beltboy clowns got nothing on Moe, Larry and Curly. :)
"You can't push ANY agenda if you CAN'T win an election."
Bingo. The fundamental problem here is not Bush. The fundamental problem is that nearly half the population are knuckleheads who can't figure out, for example, that gasoline prices are high because the Democrats impede new production at every turn. So they are going to punish Bush for it! Brilliant! Let's put the fox (Democrats) in charge of the henhouse (energy policy)!
Good logical post. I liked Reagan, but not for his 'conservative' politics, but for his way of showing the world that this is great country. Reagan made us look tough. Clinton distroyed all that and we looked weak and vulnerable. (and sex crazy, lol) W has tried to go back to the tough and firm approach, but there are just too many Clinton hold-overs and wussified people on the Hill. It's hard to stand tall when everyone's sawing off your legs.
"fundamental problem is that nearly half the population are knuckleheads"
actually, I think the problem is- half the population isn't voting! More than half, actually. And, of the ones that DO vote, half of them are idiots. Next problem will be - half the Republicans, or so-called conservatives, are going to stomp their feet, stay home and not vote, and teach ol' Bushie a lesson. Guess he won't be elected again - that'll show him.
Al Gore’s massive spending would mean slower growth and higher taxes.
G.W.B. has taken the different tack of endorsing higher spending but cutting taxes.
He expands entitlements, without reforms to sustain them.
IMO, it would be argued he offered reforms in prescription drugs, medicare and NCLB attached with higher spending of course. Whether all the reforms approach solving the problem is another argument.
Granted he makes an address to spending discipline, but he clearly couches it with amendment phrases such as "reform" or loopholes such as the combo of spending plus tax hike.
I still maintain one should have known what to expect if listening closely to what he states. Therefore I see no cause for betrayal. Just as I've always known he supported amnesty and fail to see how anyone could not. Sure, he entitles it as a "Guest worker" program, but it's essentially amnesty.
Frustration and even anger I can understand. The last thing any conservative wants is a Republican President pushing a policy that is at odds with them. When that occurs both of these feelings can rise up. But I knew what I elected and took the tradeoff because in other areas he was clearly the best candidate.
One clearly being that Al Gore wouldn't have appointed Roberts, and though it took some pressure, wouldn't have appointed Alito. G.W.B. was right as well in the statement that Gore would have raised taxes.
He certainly is. I can hardly watch him anymore...and that goes for FOX too.
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.