Trouble on the Right? Bush and His Conservative Base

Toogood Reports ^ | July 14, 2003 | W. James Antle III

[ApesForEvolution]

What? Oh, it's just you...

[CWOJackson]

Yes todd, it's me.

[Dane]

And it is increasingly likely that I will vote 3rd party in 2004.

And who would that be? Come on give us your perfect Presidential candidate and we can discuss his/her strengths and weaknesses and chances.

[ApesForEvolution]

Goose-stepping Bushbot BTTT

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Yet there are signs of trouble in paradise. First there is the anecdotal evidence.

When someone leads off with anecdotal evidence, and then segues into what is being said by blog commentators, you need to stifle the giggles.

[Catalonia]

Is embracing leftist ideals (like a new, big, fat drug entitlement versus a Medicare overhaul?) the bridge we want?

Aye, there it is. The entitlement was done to take the wind out of the sails of the Democrats and to buy the vote of the elderly. Question is, was it necessary? To a party hack who is only concerned with party politics every advantage is necessary, but such types can't usually see the forest for the trees, self-proclaimed political savviness notwithstanding. Such entitlements are nearly impossible to eliminate. If the Republican Party is going to adopt any principle willy-nilly just to get re-elected so that they can further adopt any principle willy-nilly, then politics is more a masturbatory practice of 'raid the treasury' and 'I can't work in the private sector so I'll do anything to keep my job'. That's as much a threat to the Republic as anything else. Democrats and modern liberalism are still a greater threat, I'd say, but allegiances should be given to principles, not to parties.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Oops here we go again with the 'well if you don't vote for Bush evil democrat ______ will get in'. At least with a democrat in the white house this runaway spending might've been opposed

And it certainly would, with no doubt....

[cardinal4]

I dont know what to say, maybe Im naive. But I have to tell you Im absolutley floored that anyone would do ANYTHING that offers the remote chance of President Hillary.

[CWOJackson]

You forgot anti-Constitutional jackbooted thug. It's right there on page three of your talking points.

You keep making mistakes like that and you'll loose your contract.

[sonofron]

Rove is the one i'm watching. He was the one that suggested Bush start courting Homo's and had a meeting with the log cabin republicans, a gay rights group. Call me insensitive, but i don't care about gay rights and don't want to be on the same team as them.

[ApesForEvolution]

Eggs-Zackley! You summed it up better than I've been able to. Hey, are you Todd? lol

[CWOJackson]

That is why the Democrats will infiltrate every conservative forum they can to spread dissent.

[dfrussell]

Yeah. Sure. Whatever.

And this is the same argument the DU made regarding Clinton and Republicans.

If Democrats were stupid to support an obviously flawed Clinton at all costs, why is it NOT stupid for Republicans to support and obviously flawed Bush at all costs?

[Joe Hadenuf]

Outstanding response!

[ApesForEvolution]

What? Oh, it's just you...

You seem to be so abreast of RAT talking points and what they post on their sites, you really make the strong case that you are an anti-conservative Bushbot trying to help Bush run conservatives out of the GOP.

If you are, you're doing a great job.

[CWOJackson]

See, Catalonia can keep their place in the talking points. Wasn't that from page six?

[CWOJackson]

And I'm sure you're earning your check...and the admiration of your peers.

[jmc813]

See, that's completely todd.

If you insist. FWIW, I haven't looked into it much, but I've heard that Gonzalez is pretty constructionist, which works for me. To be honest, as much as I like a good flamewar, I tried to stay away from those "Todd" threads, as I would regularly get disgusted by the posters on both sides. So what's with this first-name thing anyway?

[Miss Marple]

The proper way to get the President's attention on an issue with which you disagree is to write the White House, stating your position politely and rationally. You should also call your Congressman and Senators, letting them know your position on that issue.

No one expects people to agree with the President on everything he does. I think the Education Bill is too big and wish that there were vouchers included in it. However, I wrote the White House to remind them that they need to keep talking about vouchers and not give up. I did NOT come on here and say, "That's it, I'm voting Third Party! Bush is a leftist!"

[CWOJackson]

It's simply easier to type then tblshow.