Skip to comments.
President Bush (A liberal In A Conservative Suit ?)
vanity
| 7-16-2002
| Matthew B. Rogers
Posted on 07/16/2002 4:47:15 AM PDT by Fearless Flyers
If President Bush was trying to lower his popularity numbers, he couldnt have done a better job then by approving the liberal plea bargain agreement given to Johnny Al Qaida.
Lets remember as an over indulged spoiled brat John Walker had made a decision to dedicate the rest of his live as a foot soldier for Muslim Theocracy. Twenty years in a Federal Prison is a cakewalk compared to a lifetime as a citizen in an under developed Muslim Theocracy.
Some may believe that Johnny Al Qaida has shown more guts, then President Bush has in this case. Perhaps it is time to consider if this Republican President shares the conservative values that we expect from Republicans.
Last fall President Bush promoted an economical stimulus package that would have given big business a free ride at Tax Payers expense. There were not a lot of conservatives who agreed with this idea. President Bush signed into law the new Election Reforms which step all over the peoples right to Free Speech.
Now he gives a Treasonous Muslim who fought against Americans a slap on the wrist instead of the Death Penalty he deserved and slaps an American hero, Michael Spann in the face, for sacrificing his life for his country. Is this justice for Mr. Spann's three children?
We now have all the evidence we need to understand that President Bush is as limp wristed as his father was at the end of the Gulf War.
TOPICS: Editorial; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: johnnyalqaida; whiner
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81 next last
Flame away, I wish I was wrong about this.
To: shetlan; dorben; wingnuts'nbolts
bump
To: Fearless Flyers
It is called winning elections in a democracy.
3
posted on
07/16/2002 4:52:19 AM PDT
by
GoMonster
To: Fearless Flyers
Flame away, I wish I was wrong about this. You are, but that doesn't matter since you write a screed full of kneejerkism and bereft of facts.
4
posted on
07/16/2002 4:55:32 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: Fearless Flyers
He's just trying to "unite" with Al Qaida, not "divide" Al Qaida .
5
posted on
07/16/2002 4:55:40 AM PDT
by
Ragin1
To: Fearless Flyers
A compassionate conservative sentence. Besides, with the steel tariffs, building a cell with bars that last longer than 17 years would too expensive and when Johnny gets out, he can't harm society because any travel he will professionaly scrutinized in airports by federal agents.
6
posted on
07/16/2002 5:06:02 AM PDT
by
putupon
To: Fearless Flyers
It is so easy to criticize isn't it? The Government made some mistakes -- not declaring Lindh an enemy combatant for one. But having decided upon the road of a civil trial, there were some
holes in the Government's position. Yes, Lindh by all accounts would more than likely have been convicted, but at the cost of other American Lives, through leaked classified information.
And if the trial went forward, and others died, you'd be here writing a piece on how awful Bush is for going ahead with a civil trial.
I see courage to stop the idiocy before it started - and I also see adaptability to prevent this from happening again. They've already changed their approach -- Pedeilla is an enemy combatant like Lindh should have been.
But that mistake will not be made again.
Clinton, Gore and Co would have done what they always do best - nothing.
7
posted on
07/16/2002 5:09:53 AM PDT
by
Utopia
To: Fearless Flyers
BTW IMHO, within a year everybody will say Johnny "who". The little punk's 15 minutes of fame are up and we have been prevented from watching a circus trial, during the one year anniversary of 9/11.
8
posted on
07/16/2002 5:11:03 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: Utopia; Fearless Flyers
Exactly in regard to your reply #7.
IMHO, pious people like Fearless revel in writing "damned if Bush does, damned if Bush doesn't" screeds.
9
posted on
07/16/2002 5:16:16 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: Fearless Flyers
Now he gives a Treasonous Muslim who fought against Americans a slap on the wrist I'm certainly not one to cut Dubya any slack but I had not heard that he was personally involved in the case. Granted, the federal prosecutors work for him (through a long chain of command) but does anyone have any evidence that Dubya personally decided what the plea bargain would be?
I also haven't heard any evidence that Walker personally murdered Mr. Spann. In fact I haven't seen anything which shows him to be anything but a small fry, except for the plea bargain itself (i.e. if he's only small fry what did he have to bargain with?)
10
posted on
07/16/2002 5:23:02 AM PDT
by
alpowolf
To: Fearless Flyers
Bush CANNOT approve a plea bargin. We have seperation of powers in this country. Bush, by law, cannot influence the proceedings of the trial....go back to junior high school and read a civics book.
To: Fearless Flyers
You're forgetting the biggest test... if GWB *were* a liberal in a conservative suit, he'd be embraced openly by the Democratic party. Hasn't happened. Never will.
12
posted on
07/16/2002 5:28:50 AM PDT
by
rintense
To: Impeach the Boy
I see this plea as a victory. Any monies made from book or movie rights goes back to Uncle Sam and not to poor Johnny.
13
posted on
07/16/2002 5:30:22 AM PDT
by
Mfkmmof4
To: Fearless Flyers
I have said elsewhere and repeat here-there is exactly one policy where the Bush Administration clearly defines it's nature and purpose: It is the declared policy of this administration to shoot down unarmed civilian aircraft filled with innocent women and children (Citizens!!) rather than acknowledge the right by citizens to possess the necessary instruments of self defense guaranteed by the Constitution (firearms!!)
President Bush has not even reserved this ferocious misuse of power to his own authority having chosen instead to delegate it to two military commanders.
It is this mis-step that puts his administration in grave danger of being damned throughout eternity.
It is not too late for Mr. Bush to rescind or alter this policy.
Mr. Robinson and other Bush Administration defenders are you reading this?
Yes, Fearless,I too have come to the conclusion that the Bush Administration is little more than the third term of a Clinton Administration without the sex,drugs and rock n' roll.
Best regards,
To: alpowolf
but I had not heard that he was personally involved in the case.
I heard on one report that W was informed prior to the deal. If so, he could have nixed it.
15
posted on
07/16/2002 5:31:41 AM PDT
by
putupon
To: Fearless Flyers
The one redeaming value of this decision might be that Johnny Rat Taliban Al-qaeda Traitor Walker has agreed "full cooperation." Of course, that depends on how much "inside al-Qaeda" information he might have acquired. Even though he supposedly met bin Laden, it appears doubtful he gained much inner-working information since he seemed to be just a footsoldier.
20 years is better than nothing he might have gotten if the trial had proceeded to a public circus venue. A public hanging would have been preferable--and would have sent a significant message. The touble is, this War on Terrorism is developing into too much of a political war--shades of Viet Nam. The strong US stance of September 11, 2002 seems to be succumbing to the political wills of every self-interest group. The battles of the War on Terrorism are no longer confined to battle fields and terrorist hideouts, but rather to conference rooms, political deals, placating various groups/councils/agencies/religion (one specific, of course)/principalities/etc.
16
posted on
07/16/2002 5:36:54 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: Fearless Flyers
Now he gives a Treasonous Muslim who fought against Americans a slap on the wrist instead of the Death Penalty he deserved and slaps an American hero There are Many legitimate things to Question President Bush about that aren't "conservative" (Patriot Act, Tips Program, Vips Program, Ignoring the Borders, CFR, Ect,) This post you have here is way off base and you can not Blame the President for this one.
Live Free or Die Trying
17
posted on
07/16/2002 5:37:18 AM PDT
by
Japedo
To: Impeach the Boy; alpowolf
Bush CANNOT approve a plea bargin. We have seperation of powers in this country. Bush, by law, cannot influence the proceedings of the trial....go back to junior high school and read a civics book. Maybe you should do some research before you speak out. It has been reported by several sources and confirmed by the White House that the Justice Department sought the approval of President Bush before they agreed to the terms of the plea bargain.
To: Copernicus
They are doing a wonderful job of keeping us fighting over liberal/conservative issues, most of us don't even notice that the real goal of both parties is globalism.
19
posted on
07/16/2002 5:45:31 AM PDT
by
steve50
To: Dane
you write a screed full of kneejerkism and bereft of facts. Is that what is known as the pot calling the kettle black?
Please back up your statements instead of just projecting your kneejerkism berift of facts.
Thank You
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson