Skip to comments.
BUSH: NINE FORMER PRESIDENTS WRONG; CLINTON RIGHT!
Mountain States Legal Foundation ^
| August 1, 2002
| William Perry Pendley
Posted on 08/03/2002 12:05:07 PM PDT by Action-America
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-85 next last
Wow!Dubya is supporting Slick Willie's socialist policy over that of three Supreme Court Rulings and nine other presidents, including his own daddy and Ronald Reagan!
Can you say turncoat?
To: Principled; Bigun; pigdog; weikel; ancient_geezer; Free the USA; Libertarianize the GOP; ...
Heads Up!
To: *SCOTUS_List; *landgrab; madfly
To: Action-America
Reinforces the theory that our lands (and therefore minerals) are being used to secure the national debt.
4
posted on
08/03/2002 12:49:24 PM PDT
by
droberts
To: Action-America
Another thought is that, if they can dismantle Supreme Court's ruling that easily, what can't Bush to the same for the Second Amendment (assuming he has a real interest in restoring it, which I doubt).
5
posted on
08/03/2002 12:51:38 PM PDT
by
droberts
Comment #6 Removed by Moderator
To: Confederate Keyester
The socialist version of the communist "nationalization" of the means of production. THE STATE exerting its ownership of public lands... instead of holding them in trust for the people and businesses that ARE the true landlords.
Interesting article.
To: Action-America
Compassionate socialism. Answer this: If you knew what a disapointment Bush turned out to be, would you ever have voted for him in the first place. Lets get this thing out of the White House in 2004.
8
posted on
08/03/2002 1:26:33 PM PDT
by
Satadru
To: Satadru
You do not like President Bush - sorry. Knowing what I know today, I would vote for him again. Chances are I will vote for him in the next election.
Does that answer your question.
To: Action-America
He is NOT a turncoat.
He is a LIBERAL!
To: Action-America
To: Satadru
If you knew what a disapointment Bush turned out to be, would you ever have voted for him in the first place.
Hell NO!
Gore wouldn't have been as successful in advancing this agenda.
To: Action-America
Why do I smell another DU propaganda infiltration piece that's going to get flyswatted by the end of the day?
To: Action-America
Now wait a minute. What are these keywords about?
SOPHOMORIC POSTER; YAWN;
It looks to me like someone has hijacked John's account.
J
To: Wondervixen
Why do I smell another DU propaganda infiltration piece that's going to get flyswatted by the end of the day? BINGO
15
posted on
08/03/2002 1:45:02 PM PDT
by
mware
To: Gore_ War_ Vet
I doubt that you know much about this subject, so let me fill you in:
The State of Utah wants to set the the San Rafael Swell aside by having the feds designate it. You should know how Bush is about State's Rights and local control.
To: Satadru
Answer this: If you knew what a disapointment Bush turned out to be, would you ever have voted for him in the first place. I didn't. And I won't.I was given 4 choices on the ballot. Bush, Gore, Nader or Browne. I voted for Browne.
When Bush was elected I hoped he would be better than Gore.
He isn't. Gore would not have gotten away with what Bush has done and is doing.
17
posted on
08/03/2002 1:48:20 PM PDT
by
carenot
To: Satadru
If you knew what a disappointment Bush turned out to be, would you ever have voted for him in the first place. Lets get this thing out of the White House in 2004.
As difficult as it was for me, being a lifelong GOP activist, I didn't vote for him. I found it necessary to vote for Harry Browne, not because I agreed with everything that he stood for (I actually disagreed with him on a number of issues), but because Browne was by far, the closest thing to a conservative in the race. Being from Texas, I had ample opportunity to see Dubya at work before he became the darling of the GOP can do no wrong crowd and was therefore, well aware of Dubya's left-leaning tendency.
If the GOP doesn't find a better candidate for President soon, the Democrats won't have to worry about fielding a good candidate in 2004, because if Dubya wins, the Democrats win by default.
To: Action-America
a dubious regulation adopted because of the anti-mining zealotry of William Jefferson Clinton? I wonder... didn't x42 shut down US low sulpher coal fields, a move that basically helps the Ryady (sp.?) family with their Asian low sulpher coal? While Bushie might appear to be siding with Clinton, it is probably for different reasons. Maybe Cliff's Synfuel was just going to sit on the rights rather than develop it...needs more research.
To: Action-America
Tancredo for President 2004!
20
posted on
08/03/2002 2:27:51 PM PDT
by
bok
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-85 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