Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ohioWfan; Wpin; sickoflibs

Yeah, all the social conservative ideals that I share with you, which allowed us to be pandered to. How can you not be (as a conservative) upset about big government, big spending, open borders, and nationalized banks? I voted for W because I’m pro-life (my no 1 issue), pro Israel and national security (my no 2 issue), and he pandered to me in those areas. On National Security I feel he fought a splendid war...but left the borders open. Limited government (my number 3 issue, which includes limited spending) is one of the three crucial legs to the conservative stool. Without that leg, the stool falls over. I get that you are a social conservative, as am I, but you must at some point come to a decision to be honest with yourself about the whole conservative picture. Reagan: conservative. Palin: conservative. Bush: definately not.


170 posted on 12/03/2009 12:21:59 PM PST by genetic homophobe (They hate Sarah because she lovingly carries a failed abortion on her hip.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]


To: genetic homophobe; ohioWfan; Wpin

RE :”On National Security I feel he fought a splendid war...but left the borders open”

I have even changed my thoughts on that. He had to be special to get the majority of the american public to prefer democrats over republicans from 2007-2008. I know the Bush-bots will claim it all MSM lies. I mean wanting democrats? Obama ? National security? You gotta be special to do that.

As far as the economy goes, I will save that for other threads.


171 posted on 12/03/2009 12:34:47 PM PST by sickoflibs ( "It's not the taxes, the redistribution is the government spending you demand stupid")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

To: genetic homophobe
You forgot to mention a most critical part of returning the country to conservatism, and that is regarding the judiciary.

In that area, conservative, originalist judges and SC Justices, President Bush even outranks Reagan. There is no Sandra Day O'Connor among his appointees.

I am completely "honest with myself." Don't misunderstand my enthusiasm for President Bush (which I proudly wear), as agreement with every policy. I understand the problem with limited government and spending, but I also see the tax-cutting and pro-business policies that Bush has as part of the overall conservatism. I am also (see my tagline) strongly pro-military and national defense, and in that, President Bush is unsurpassed.

But I think this discussion, which is essentially a hijack of this thread (about Rochester police, right? :), should be ended, so I will do my part to do so.

Hopefully you and I have a better understanding of each other because of this conversation.

172 posted on 12/03/2009 12:47:35 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

To: genetic homophobe
Oh.......one point I forgot to mention in my last post.

When one does what one believes to be the right thing based on conviction, it is not in any way, shape or form, "pandering."

President Bush never did that. You know that, if you understand that he is a man of character. He believed strongly in the sanctity of life, and stood for life at every point in his administration. The idea that he was "pandering" is absurd. He did what he believed. And it was the right thing.

173 posted on 12/03/2009 12:50:13 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

To: genetic homophobe; ohioWfan; sickoflibs

President Bush did not takeovere the banks...he injected funds into the system very rapidly because someone(s) pulled huge amounts of money out of some banks in just a few hours. If he had not done that we would be in a severe, severe depression, much much worse than now. He put no strings to the money, it was a typical courageous Bush move which worked. When asked about leaving the democrats in a position to take advantage of the situation and take over private sectors he stated “I really do not believe the American people will allow that” and I think he is right.

In regards to spending, sure I would have much preferred he veto a bunch of spending from the congress. Remember, it is the congress who spends, not the President. But, in his defense...he had an incredible amount on his plate and there was a war being waged against him from within our nation by the traitors from the left. Not to mention the War On Terror, Katrina, Recession he inherited and resolved very quickly. He managed to protect us beautifully, he stood up for life and gave many of us confidence through his example. You will not find a more economic conservative than I, but we have to consider all the facts, not just pick and choose a couple. President Bush gave us tax cuts, tried to make private accounts for some of our retirement, restore the private ownership society, and so many wonderful things that most of you forget. So, hell he had to go along with a Republican congress who spent like democrats...he kept us free and safe. All the while doing so much incredible good throughout the world.

Do you realize he is credited with saving millions of lives in Africa? His actions in the middle east have helped bring some women’s rights to Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan. He warned us this War on Terror would last far longer than his tenure as President, but that we must stay the course or there will be dire consequences.

History will be very good to President Bush, I am certain. He is truly one of the worlds greatest leaders of all time and it is a shame that so many do not get to truly enjoy the truth in that.


178 posted on 12/03/2009 1:49:09 PM PST by Wpin (I do not regret my admiration for W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson