Posted on 07/07/2007 7:34:22 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Oh, the bushbashers have an answer....don't know if they really mean it. But there's plenty of times, even from intelligent and good looking freepers that I've read, "Well, If Hillary gets in because the GOP doesn't give me a True-Blu conservative out of the primaries and I sit out the election, then it's the GOP's fault that the country will go totally socialist, not mine."
And there's this one, "I will no longer grin and bear voting for a non-prolifer. It would not be moral. But if an amoral, pro-abortionist democrat gets elected, nationalizes healthcare, and starts using my tax dollars to fund abortions, well, that too, is not my fault. It's the GOP's fault that I chose to let Hillary! win..."
There's an irrational streak in these conservative inactivists that even DUmmies can't match at times.
Unfortunately you’re all too correct.
Why yes, I am a treasure. I’m a conservative Bush supporter being attacked by conservatives on a conservative website.
Doohickey, I’m not looking for internet credibility. Yes, I’m a “newbie” (rolls eyes) and thus, I realize that the DU posters who have more internet longevity here are treated with more respect. I’m not looking for any of that.
I’m defending my President who is under constant attack.
Now, I took your advice and “searched” for all of the threads attacking Bush for his immigration stance in 2004. I found two. But, oddly enough, reading through those posts, you find very few FReepers who advocated Bush’s defeat due to his immigration stance. The typical post was along the lines of.....”I don’t like Bush’s immigration stance but I’m not voting for Kerry”. Now, I’m being told by those of you with internet longevity that you wanted him defeated in 2004 due to his immigration stance. Doesn’t seem to be the case. You only want to destroy him now.
The immigration stance by Bush just wasn’t a huge issue before the election. An issue, yes, but “the” issue, no.
Now that it has been defeated, I’m not understanding the constant bashing of the President by those who voted for him knowing his stance on that very same immigration issue.
First off, that's rude.
Now. Yes, this is a conservative web site. Conservative. As opposed to Republican. Republicans as much fair game for criticism as Democrats when they do un-conservative things. The President is a fabulous social conservative, but he is definitely no fiscal conservative, and certainly no nationalist. We who had our doubts were encouraged to compromise - another Bush term was certainly better than a Kerry presidency. We voted for him despite his stance on immigration, not because of it. Now that we don't have a permanent tax cut and we need not be concerned with preserving our majority in Congress, it's time to assess whether or not the Republican party is even the party of conservative ideals any longer.
You've been told on a number of occasions on this thread that the President certainly was criticized for his refusal to secure our borders and for his profligate spending. Please stop asserting to the contrary. If we wanted President Bush defeated in 2004, then he most certainly would have been. That's not to say that I don't feel let down - I a long way from being willing to again stand in front of my state's capital on a rainy November morning with a Sore Loserman sign.
This criticism is a long way from "destroying" him. If you want to take a few extreme comments made in the heat of a discussion as the general opinion of forum as a whole, that's your problem. You and I are only two of thousands of individual contributors to this forum. Each of us have different opinions, different priorities and different perspectives.
Therefore I would humbly suggest that if you think the President is being criticized unjustly, you could try to convince we miscreants who are picking on him that securing the border is a bad idea. Or that amnesty is good. Or CFR, NCLB, Medicare Part D, or the Farm Bill were terrific ways to spend out tax dollars.
Lastly, welcome to Free Republic. I hope you are a conservative as you say you are so that I can look forward to agreeing with you in the future.
Agreed. About time. I would rather see this than cozying up with Ted Kennedy on legislation.
Whenever I see anyone resorting to such I can safely assume their positions are suspect.
Your statement was very similar to the the liberals' claim that President Bush was entering the war "unilaterally" some years back. They repeated the mantra over and over and over again even though it was never true.
President Bush actually has quite a bit of support. If he didn't he wouldn't have been able to easily get the defense funding bill through Congress some weeks back, even though the Democrats tried everything in their playbook to slow down, change or stop it. You are swallowing media propogranda, probably because you have a weakness for hyperbole.
Sounds like the President feels double-crossed. We on FR could have told him they’d do that!
“rolls eyes” That’s rude? Give me a break.
Doohickey, I am absolutely mortified by the constant Bush bashing on this so called “conservative” website.
I’ve been a conservative for longer than most of you have been on this earth.
For those of you claiming now that you really don’t support Bush’s stands on many issues (which have *not* changed), why did you vote for him? Say what you want about the man, but when he says he supports something he really does mean it. He doesn’t flip and flop all over the place.
Anyhow, I’m not going to argue.
I realize that those of you with internet longevity stick together like glue. You bash Bush and frankly, it makes me sick. But, since I don’t have your internet longevity, my posts are met with the refrains of “how dare you criticize a long term FReeper, even though he/she is wrong”. So, bash away. I won’t bother with you.
We are headed toward a democrat in the White House. Then, you’ll have something to complain about. If that happens, look in the mirror.
So, if I bother you, well, that’s life. Just act as if I’m not here and stick with the gang that has the same internet longevity.
As for me? I’m sticking with President Bush. I am VERY proud of him.
Except I'm a conservative and I don't really have a problem with his execution of the WOT (except for ridiculous ROE). Other than that, yeah, it's way similar.
Pretending that everyone who criticizes Senor Bush is really a liberal at heart will not change the current state of affairs. Feel free to keep your head where it is.
Really? Then why even hyperbolize in whining and say "no one is following him". Strange.
Pretending that everyone who criticizes Senor Bush is really a liberal
I didn't say anything about "everyone".
And I didn't "pretend" even you were a liberal. I said you were hyperbolizing which is a common tactic of theirs. You are twisting my words.
It's a waste of time debating with someone who does that because they never honestly debate facts, choosing to twist things merely to suit their viewpoints.
Because he has done such a poor job in articulating his execution that the vast majority of the people in the country disagree with his handling of it. I believe that if they understood his reasoning, we'd have at least 50% of the country on board. His poor communication of his ideals in re: the WOT is in large part to blame (in my estimation).
“Power is in money, the more we give them, the more at fault we are.”
We are a minority of TWO! I cannot believe the number of people I know that think NOTHING of giving Uncle Sam an interest-free “loan” of their money each year and then rejoice at their Tax Refund at the end of the year. *ROLLEYES*
Citizens really need to get a grip and realize that if we cut off the blood supply (our tax dollars) the Cancerous Beast can be slowed down.
*SIGH* But that’s never going to happen in my lifetime, so I just do what I can to keep every dime of mine out of their mitts in the first place. :)
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.