[poet]

Yes, he has lost my vote and at least 20 other Constitutional Consevatives in my sphere of influence.

We will remind people of his NEW spending of $982,000,000,000 on social programs and the demoRAT policies he has embraced.

He, like his dad are great "wartime" presidents, but, their domestic economic policies leave much to be desired.

FReegards





















FReegards

[rintense]

Well, I am interested to see what he will do now that the Iraq situation is pretty much in the bag. I've never really bought the line that people vote with their pocketbooks. But that all depends on how horrible the media can spin our economic vitality in the next year.

Hint: it won't be good spin.

[Capitalism2003]

I think it would be very sad if issues like this divide our party and end up giving away certain victory to the dems across the country next year...If you think Dubya upholding this ban is a bad thing, wait till you get a moron like Dick Gephardt in office. We are letting this issue do to us what Ralph Nader did to the dems in 2000. People need to consider the alternatives to Bush...not a pretty sight.

[okiesap]

Those who will be too angry to vote for Bush 43 will be cutting their noses to spite their faces. Presidents have got to move close to the middle to have any chance at winning an election. The sad fact is you don't have to have a grasp of the importance of the 2nd Amendment to cast a vote. You don't have to have any intelligence whatsoever. Voters in 2004, like voters before them, will vote on the candidates charisma rather than issues. That anyone with the knowledge and understanding of the evils of liberalism emboddied by opportunists like Ms. Rodham would sit on or throw away a vote is beyond my comprehension.