Freeper Grassroots Movement to Re-Elect Bush

July 24, 2003 | nwrep

[nwrep]

I want to kick off a grass-roots movement to educate and inform discerning Democrats about the real nature of their party and am soliciting suggestions from Freepers. The reasons I am doing this are several, as listed below:

* I have several conservative Democrat friends who have always voted D, but who disagree with the stance of their party on issues like AA, tax-cuts, and regulations.

* These people do not understand that regardless of the "moderate" local Dem candidate they vote for, the party agenda is driven in Congress by an extremely liberal faction of the party.

* Case in point #1: I alerted one friend to Rep. Rangel's remarks about the death of Hussein's sons yesterday (Rangel said it was "illegal" for the US to kill them). The friend said he disagreed with Rangel, and the majority of the Dems would similarly disagree with the Congressman. I asked this friend if he knew who Rangel was. He had never heard of him. I informed him coolly that if the Dem regain the House, Rangel would become the Chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Cte., where all spending bills originate, and that he is one of the most influential members of his party in the House. The friend was shocked.

* Case in point #2: I asked another Dem friend what he thought of Kerry. He gave me a canned response about his Vietnam service, etc. I then asked him if he knew about his anti-Vietnam war stance. He said he did not, but that his parents (lifelong Dem voters like himself) hated Jane Fonda and everything she stood for. I then forwarded him the NewsMax expose of Kerr's Vietnam stance, his anti-war book, his rallies with Fonda and Ramsey Clark, and his statement to the US Senate in 1971. After reading all that, he said he was disgusted, and would forward it to his mother. He conceded that if Kerry were to be the nominee, he would vote for Bush.

* The problem is that these Dem voters are blissfully unaware of the voting records of their candidates and representatives. All they go by are finely crafted campaign statements issued during the last few weeks before the election where they pay homage to FDR, Truman and JFK. As a result, these dopey Dem voters (like my friends and their parents) continue voting for these candidates thinking they are voting for FDR/JFK-like candidates.

We need to educate these people and keep them as well informed as we Freepers are about the real day to day legislative agenda of the Rat Party. We need to highlight how they continue to vote against the best interest of these conservative, patriotic Democrats (like my friends) and how they continue to display hypocrisy by constantly changing their stance on major issues.

How do we do this?

[Southack]

"You act as though the issue of the ICC's juridiction over U.S. citizens is settled. It's not by any means settled by this temporary fix. I'm pretty sure it will be settled in the future something along these lines. The US government will decide which citizens are subject to be turned over to the ICC."

No, the ICC jurisdictional issue in America has most certainly been settled. It has **none** inside U.S. territory due to Bush.

[YoungKentuckyConservative]

Bush kicks his conservative base in the nuts and we're all supposed to be excited about backing him? No thanks. I'll probably end up voting for him, but I'm in no way wasting my time promoting another "fake" conservative. Screw it. I'd rather watch a football game and have a beer.

[Southack]

I tell you what, you show me just one legitimate U.S. government web source that posts an official government definition of a free trade zone that matches your "no sovereign borders" claim (post #164), and I'll carry the tag line of your choice from now until Friday.

Now, do you believe in your claim strongly enough to mirror my tag line bet back to me? I mean, you did question whether I had even "bothered" studying this issue, after all...

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Oh no, I refuse to go several hundred years down memory lane. Lets deal with here now!

Oh, come on. You said something quite provocative, and I really think I'm too much of a bulldog to let you go that easily. : )

Based on your remarks, I am under the impression that you believe your relatives who sought American citizenship and earned it were gutless individuals who lacked the courage to stay in their own countries and make them better.

Is that accurate? That's all I want to know.

Thank you, by the way, for your service.

[hchutch]

That is between Jim Robinson and the violators, and is to be handled by the appropriate people.

Personally, I think that on some threads, the racism line is crossed, but that is just me.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Based on your remarks, I am under the impression that you believe your relatives who sought American citizenship and earned it were bla bla yak yak.....

Get out of the 1950s, and enter the year 03. Here, I am getting tired of typing.....Here, allow me to repeat.

How many millions do they suggest we take in? 20 million more? 50 million more? 150 million more? Should we be building 200-story, pink apartment buildings on the plains of Texas to accomadate them?

Our schools and social services are being choked off, jails are full of foreigners, both legal and illegal, our highways are packed, land fills full, limited resources, taxes too high, parking lots full, and hospitals are take a number while the entire ER is packed with non english speakers, millions are out of work, and press number #1 for English......LOL!

Enough of this bull sh*t. What the hell is wrong with people? Can they not see the government is the cause of all of this chaos, while Americans have been screaming for relief for years. What's up with this?

[hchutch]

But those facts don't fit in with the perception that Bush is caving in. I am beginning to wonder if there are not elements trying to split conservatives.

Yeah, we got a big step, much further than Gingrich ever wanted, and we paid a price. But some people will always let the perfect be the enemy of good enough.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Nothing is wrong with me, Joe.

I just wanted a 'yes' or 'no' answer to a simple question (that I asked quite politely, I might add).

I'm just glad you weren't checking people in at Ellis Island.

[Joe Hadenuf]

I am told I am full blooded Apache. So what was that question you had paleface?

[Sabertooth]

It seems apparent that you are hell bent on picking a fight with Luis over something unrelated to the topic of this thread

This subtopic came up long before I posted on the thread. There's no fight, I'm expressing an opinion. I believe in abiding by the owner's posting guidelines, and I also believe it's poor form to gloat about one's violations.

If that's controversial, so be it.

[Sabertooth]

That is between Jim Robinson and the violators, and is to be handled by the appropriate people.

Agreed. I support the posting guidelines, and adhere to them. How about you?

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

I don't understand why you're being rude. I'm simply asking you to clarify something you said.

If you are full-blooded Apache, then let's just generalize the question to include the immigrant relatives of all your "paleface" - thank you very much for that epithet, by the way - friends and extended family, if there are any "palefaces" in that group, that is.

[Jhoffa_]

I like Joe. He doesn't make me ashamed at all

He's a blunt American, who calls it like he sees it.

I feel the same way.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Whatever. If I want in on a brawl, you'll know it. I would appreciate not being dragged in.

[justshe]

IMO.......bringing up the multiple nicks had nothing to do with the subject of those who arrive on our shores--and when, did it?

Didn't you just use the term 'gutless' and apply it to a subject not addressed by the poster's comment?

[hchutch]

Never been banned or suspended. Maybe a few posts pulled, but I never kept track of that too much.

This has been the ONLY ID I have had here.

MAYBE some folks have taken instances where I have called a spade a spade as a personal attack, but I've got no control over that.

[Sabertooth]

I am told I am full blooded Apache.

Well played. Wow. Post of the year, right here.

[Joe Hadenuf]

If you are full-blooded Apache, then let's just generalize the question to include the immigrant relatives of all your "paleface"

Huh? You speak with forked tongue. What do my relatives or anyone else have to do with my posts? What don't you get about American Indians regretting not having adequate border control? We should take note of that, or live to regret it for many moons....Those that speak often of the past, tend to live in the past...Regardless of who my relatives were, we need our borders controlled and our sovereignty protected or we will lose this country. Plain and simple.

[Sabertooth]

Never been banned or suspended. Maybe a few posts pulled, but I never kept track of that too much.

This has been the ONLY ID I have had here.

My apologies if I was unclear. Never meant to imply that you had.

You and I have thrown our flames in the past, and you've always had the honor and honesty to do so under your own screen name. I've done the same with you. You've been, at the end of the day, a worthy adversary.

The point of my post was with regard to those who don't adhere to the posting guidelines. It's OK if you don't want to answer, the question was as much rhetorical as anything.

[ODDITHER]

I have found that asking them questions, rather than stating what I believe straight out is the most effective way to get their attention. I never tell them I am a republican, unless they ask. I ask them to name some of the people that they admire in politics. I ask them what it is that makes them admire them.

Except for the way out leftists who would never change their mind anyway, these questions, with follow up questions usually makes them realize they have nothing in common with the democratic party and much in common with the republican party.