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

Skip to comments.

Will George W Bush really suffer his father's fate?
The Sunday Telegraph ^ | April 20, 2003 | Julian Coman

Posted on 04/19/2003 4:20:39 PM PDT by MadIvan

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-200 next last
To: BlackbirdSST
King George only won in 2000 because of loyal albore states gave him their vote over the single issue of GUNS.

Oh no, the fact that Gore was anti-coal and an enviro-whacko never entered the minds of WV voters or that Gore was a known entity in TN, and that the scandals around him, like the Buddhist temple never entered their minds.

You single issue malcontnents lose your credibity and gain derision, with your over the top dramatics.

161 posted on 04/20/2003 5:11:27 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Dane
I do find it interesting that so many people who didn't support the President in the last election are now going to vehemently oppose him in the next.
162 posted on 04/20/2003 5:17:23 AM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
The assault weapons ban has nothing to do with machine guns. Get your facts straight. People don't hunt deer with machine guns either.

Also, every winter 30 to 50 percent of deer, elk and antilope starve to death. That's the way of nature and has nothing to do with hunting. It's better they end up in hunters freezers where they feed families.

163 posted on 04/20/2003 6:06:08 AM PDT by glockmeister40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Okay, let me see if I have this right, oh great political genius:

Passing a clearly unconstitutional law that restricts my freedom of speech and assembly in violation of his oath of office makes GW Bush a political genius, because even though it is illegal and unconstitutional, it hurts the Democrats, so it's a great move. I'm just too stupid to see it. Got it. Brilliant.

I lost $750,000 in the stock market in the past three years, so please...peddle your bulls--t about the economy being better somewhere else, okay? If you actually BELIEVE the economy is in good shape right now, you're a worse thinker than you are a speller. Taxes are too high, government is too big, and investor confidence is low. Refinancing houses can only prop up the economy for so long, and something's gonna give. Watch and learn.

Again, you have absolutely no right to call me stupid or question my conservative principles because I cannot in good conscience vote for any of the candidates. I will still vote in my local elections (if I can), but I will cast no vote for President.

As far as your red herring BS argument about my claiming to be more conservative than GW Bush (or you), I AM. That was an easy one. And yes, I must be politically naive because I didn't drink the kool aid and I watch the actions of politicans (on either side) rather than what spews from their mouths and my own projections, hopes and dreams.

Wake up sonny. You're doing more damage to my party with your goosestepping than my heresy over Bush the fake conservative.

Whatever.

164 posted on 04/20/2003 6:10:33 AM PDT by ModernDayCato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
I'm tired of the 'lesser of two evils' choice. I don't want too evils. I'll tell you one way electing another Dimocrat will further my goals - It will put the Bushbots and the real conservatives on the same side. And at least the Bushbots will realize that they've been in the pot, so maybe we'll all get off our @sses and do something about it. Frankly, I think it's too late, but time will tell.

No offense, but I'm really sick of people dragging up the Reagan quote. Comparing Bush to Reagan makes me ill.

Bush is NEVER, EVER going to come up with 75 to 80% of what Conservatives want. You want some Reagan quotes? Here you go:

The size of the federal budget is not an appropriate barometer of social conscience or charitable concern.

We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much.

Government growing beyond our consent had become a lumbering giant, slamming shut the gates of opportunity, threatening to crush the very roots of our freedom. What brought America back? The American people brought us back -- with quiet courage and common sense; with undying faith that in this nation under God the future will be ours, for the future belongs to the free.

[G]overnment's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.

So please, let's not call Bush the new Reagan. He lacks so many things like a conservative ideology.

165 posted on 04/20/2003 6:21:06 AM PDT by ModernDayCato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill
Here, let me repeat the Bushbot mantra:

1. Yes, I'm an idiot.

2. Yes, the facts are not important.

3. Yes, you are much smarter than me because you can see the big picture and I'm fixated on choosing someone who shares my beliefs and doesn't provide support to ideas and people with which I do not agree.

4. You are far shrewder politically than I am.

5. You are a better conservative than I am.

Did I cover them all, genius?

166 posted on 04/20/2003 6:25:46 AM PDT by ModernDayCato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
The Demoncrats have no viable candidate to run against Bush, but Bush has alienated a whole lot of rock ribbed conservatives, like myself, who will either write in a candidate, or go fishing on election day.

So the question of his winning again is as open as is his cryptic statement that he may not run again in 2004.
167 posted on 04/20/2003 6:34:32 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #168 Removed by Moderator

To: gcruse
"Bush may find that out if he signs the so-called "Assault" Weapons ban."

So lets examine the trade offs. There are 85 million guns owners in the U.S. Most are middle class and male. Only 6 million of these belong to the NRA and are politically tuned in. That leaves another 79 million that are not so politically tuned in. Of that 79 million over half are swing and democrat voters. They will not remember that Feinswine and Schumer Scum reintroduced the assault weapons bill. They will remember that Dubya stabbed them in the back. They will perceive that there is little or no difference between canidates and many of them being Union or Reagan democrats will vote their other interests.

Dubya and his adminstration has to make deals. If he does not the democraps will filibuster tax cuts, national security, and other important issues. The 79 million mostly does not care or know how Washington works. They will swing left.

The NRA is a given quantity and is over 80% Republican. The 79 million is up for grabs. The end result is that weak Republicans will fall in Midwest,Southern, and some Western States even if Dubya is reelected. It will weaken his hand and reduce the presidents effectiveness even if he is elected to a second term.

One thing Republicans have never been very skillful at is playing politics, and being the majority party is a new experience. The assualt weapons bill brought down Bill Clinton and swept the Republicans into office for the first time in 60 years.

One would hope that the RNC and Duyba adminstration is not as short sighted as to forget what bought them to Washington in the first place.

169 posted on 04/20/2003 6:47:00 AM PDT by SSN558 (Be on the lookout for Black/White Supremacists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
Funny you should say that. I was at a dinner some time ago with the Republican House candidate in the next state over, and they were plugged into the Republican scene.

They said the heir apparent is none other than Tom Ridge, which makes a lot of sense. He's worse than GW, unfortunately. Got room on your fishing boat?

170 posted on 04/20/2003 6:47:04 AM PDT by ModernDayCato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

Comment #171 Removed by Moderator

To: Joe_October
Ross Perot and CNN.

CNN was credible back then. No more. They were as looney Left as they are now, but now the people know it.

Wow, I had forgotten about the role of CNN. Without Larry King's help, Perot would not have had a podium for his appealing populist views. I predicted, after he dropped out of the race in July, that he would jump back in just before the election. The fact that Perot was leading and then withdrew convinced me that the whole thing was a set up to help defeat Perot's old nemesis, Bush.

172 posted on 04/20/2003 7:07:00 AM PDT by giotto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: ModernDayCato
I lost $750,000 in the stock market in the past three years, so please...peddle your bulls--t about the economy being better somewhere else, okay? If you actually BELIEVE the economy is in good shape right now, you're a worse thinker than you are a speller. Taxes are too high, government is too big, and investor confidence is low. Refinancing houses can only prop up the economy for so long, and something's gonna give. Watch and learn

Boo freaking hoo. You got caught up in Clinton's buuble and now you are blaming Bush.

Oh BTW, if it wasn't for some RINO's in the Senate there would be a tax cut. So don't blame Bush, blame Voinivich and Snowe.

I know, I know, your answer will be well Bush is President and it is all his fault. Wrong it is the Senate, where there are 45 reliable conservative votes and people on our side should be trying to get that number well above 50. But noOOOoooo you just want to chuck it all away for Hillary or demo Presidency.

"Yea that will teach them", ModernDayCato says as he cuts off his nose to spite his face.

173 posted on 04/20/2003 7:48:45 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: sd-joe
I neither want to nor can disagree with what you postulate.

911 and its aftermath have changed everything and continue to affect both geo and national politics. It was and continues to be a seminal and possibly cataclysmic event in the history of the world. GW has responded magnificently, IMHO, to those events.

One of the many effects is that it has and is continuing to effect the attitudes of many of the "single issue" conservative crowds way of thinking. But old habits die hard.

While I find many of GW's stands on domestic social and political issues unpalatable, at the end of the day there is one thunderous conclusion I come to:

It would be un-safe to see another DemocRAT as our Commander in Chief!!!

Many bedrock conservatives, self included, will come to that conclusion and re-affirm that fact in November 2004 by voting for a less than ideal candidate Bush. And many, self included will do so happily, with the realization that placing a DemocRAT in charge will quite literally be playing Russian Islamic Roulette.

I am sure I and others will find ourselves taking issue with GW on his decisions that fly in the face of our desire to preserve and protect the Constitution as written, but knowing that, at least for the present, the threat to our Republic is far greater from outside forces than it is and has, in the recent past, been from internal forces.

We could go on and on expounding on the reasons to both support or not support GW. You are correct, given the circumstances, it is just short of amazing what he has accomplished since his election and 911. Not only do most Americans deeply want to trust the man, I for one do believe that he is sincerely honest in his desire to serve the greater needs of the Republic in these very trying times.

The bottom line is that, like him or not, he will be our "best" possible choice in the next election cycle given the alternatives.

174 posted on 04/20/2003 7:53:11 AM PDT by ImpBill ("You are either with US or against US!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
You need to wake up from that fantasy world you're living in.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.


175 posted on 04/20/2003 8:05:22 AM PDT by MatthewViti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!
It's quite clear that you and your ilk are staunchly anti-2nd Amendment.
176 posted on 04/20/2003 8:08:54 AM PDT by MatthewViti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST
LOL, right on man!
177 posted on 04/20/2003 8:11:37 AM PDT by MatthewViti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: ImpBill
Well said.
178 posted on 04/20/2003 8:17:30 AM PDT by sd-joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Proud2BAmerican
Sure is a lot of us, ain't there. (gun nuts)
Something for GW to remember.
Jack
179 posted on 04/20/2003 8:31:33 AM PDT by btcusn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ModernDayCato
Wow, Tom Ridge? What a nightmare, just as bad as Carl Rove.
I think I may need an ark instead of a fishing boat.
180 posted on 04/20/2003 8:37:18 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-200 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.

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