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?

[Saundra Duffy]

Bush supports marriage between a man and a woman. That's a biggie. Oh, and he saved our butts from God knows how many other terrorist attacks.

[Scenic Sounds]

Clarified, BTW, I am very conservative, to the point that I don't like my tax dollars being used to feed some Indian or Chinese Scumbag who came here and received their education on my tax dollar. I am glad you toe the party line, need a few lemmings like you myself for a cliff jumping coming up here in Nov.

Well, bless your heart, I know that you don't really mean to be abusive like that.

This politics stuff can get pretty frustrating sometimes, though. You hang in there, buddy, and if there's anything I can do to help, you just holler. ;-)

[samuel_adams_us]

Am not really abusive, only to those who are weak of soul. Military brat, tell it like it is. Not a sensitive man of the 90's wear briefs, not panties.

[Scenic Sounds]

Am not really abusive, only to those who are weak of soul. Military brat, tell it like it is. Not a sensitive man of the 90's wear briefs, not panties.

LMAO. I knew there was a sense of humor behind all those nasty posts. If you let others see it, though, it's gonna wreck your schtick.

LOL. And I want you to hold onto your schtick just as long as you can. :-)

[samuel_adams_us]

What's the old saying, keep your ... and your powder dry?

[JustAnAmerican]

"Your blame of Bush shows just how little you understand about politics. Get on the horn to your representatives, if it's so bad in your area. Get involved. In otherwords, put up, or shut up.

Oh I understand quite a bit about politics, I understand that money speaks louder then words to some of these politicians. I also understand that most politicians care absolutely nothing about the people who put them in office once they get elected. Case in point, a majority of Americans oppose illegal-immigration, yet time after time some Republicans and most Dims pass or try to pass pro-illegal-immigration bills.

Most "Working" American oppose the current trend of companies outsourcing and bringing more H1B/L1 types to this country. Yet, will wonders never cease, the Politicians continue to pass pro-outsourcing/H1b/L1 bills.Tsk, Tsk, like it really saddens me that you and yours do not like my "Righteous indignation", come 2004 the politicians that espouse your views will be looking for work. And guess what, me and my "Righteous Self" will be leading the bandwagon to make sure that happens. After all, this is a free country :)

[Scenic Sounds]

What's the old saying, keep your ... and your powder dry?

LMAO. You're okay by me, buddy.

And, go ahead, you can let go of your schtick now. ;-)

[JustAnAmerican]

"And just what do you expect Bush personally to do about it? Run down and slam a big gate shut?

How about upholding the law of the land, you know, that little thing that our society is based on. Doesn't sound too hard to me, and here I thought that's what we elected Presidents of these United States for, silly me.

[Southack]

"It's long past time that Bush vetoed something, and his hesitence to do so is ill-advised."

Ill advised politically, or ill-advised from a conservative ideological viewpoint?

Politically, what Bush is doing is brilliant. No one can paint him as an obstructionist, and the ball is constantly put back in Congress' court.

Democrats would **love** to see Bush veto something, anything, any thing at all, in fact. They would love to be able to show either that Bush doesn't care about some group, or that Bush is reversing his principles, or that Bush is standing in the way of some great thing. Not that the specifics would matter to the Democrats, whatever Bush vetoed they would find an angle to bash him on it.

Moreover, they would use his veto as evidence that he had lost control of his Republican-majority Congress. They'd paint him as out of touch with his own Party.

Instead, Bush is getting **everything** that he wanted. Oh, the federal judicial appointments are taking longer than would be desireable in an ideal world, but by and large Congress right now is afraid to withhold any funds that Bush wants. Every campaign promise that Bush made, Bush can deliver on.

Why would he blow that sweetheart deal?!

Now granted, I'd like to see less money spent by Washington A.C. / D.C., but the level of spending is manageable, and it is buying us every conservative thing that we want (e.g. partial birth abortion ban, national ABM defenses set up in Alaska, death of the Kyoto global warming nonsense, death of the ICC madness, two raises for our military, full military funding, two major income tax cuts, the death of the estate tax, the death of the dividend double-tax, etc.).

And if we weren't at war, I'd be even more concerned about the spending, but I'm hardly going to want my Senators to stand up in a 1942-style Congress and tell FDR that we shouldn't be spending all this money on ships and certainly shouldn't be funding this black book "Manhattan Project" thing for $2 Billion, or whatever the modern day equivilent would be.

The overspending is sad, but should hardly surprise anyone. Bush's campaign promises weren't cheap wishes, and Bush is the style of leader who delivers.

Moreover, in a nation so evenly split ideologically, getting Conservative victories passed through Congress is going to come at some not-so-cheap price. No doubt that there will be many on FR who bicker like mad at the looming price tag on private school choice vouchers, but how else are we going to kill the power of the public school teachers' unions without them? So, the price must be paid.

Blood and treasure. We are spending both.

What I don't want to hear is that we aren't getting anything for our blood, or that we aren't buying anything with our treasure. 'Tis one thing to spend so much, 'tis another altogether to spend and lose the battle anyway. That's the path that we must avoid.

And so far, Bush has been avoiding such defeats admirably.

[Dog Gone]

I'm sick of the federal spending just like everyone else here. But the one nice benefit to deficit spending is that it gives an ironclad excuse for refusing to fund Democrat proposals which would make it even worse.

[hchutch]

EXCELLENT POST!!!!

The folks complaining about such things need to realize that the TANSTAAFL* principle applies to them, too.

[hchutch]

Oops.

* TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

[The Coopster]

So you're saying that you believe Bush is the sole culprit for all your immigration woes?

Oh, and my mistake. I didn't realize that the President directly oversees the INS/Border Patrol.

You're laying the blame at the wrong feet. Period. Get at least a small clue.

[JustAnAmerican]

"So you're saying that you believe Bush is the sole culprit for all your immigration woes?

No, however he plays a big part in how our country handles illegal immigrants, if the upper level doesn't want the borders patroled properly or the illegals sent back, then that just gives the pro-illegal group more of a push to keep doing it. Or are you trying to tell me that "Protect from all enemies foreign and domestic" is not the Presidents job?.I noticed the "your" in that sentence, does this mean you (1)Are not an American, or (2)You do not believe illegal immigrants should be rounded up and deported back to whence they came?

I think I have a pretty good clue what should or should not be done, protect "AMERICANS and AMERICA", can't see how that could be any plainer.

[Chad Fairbanks]

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

How did that happen? Were you walking down the street one day, when some said "Hey Joe, did you know you are full-blooded Apache"? and you thought to yourself, "Wow! Would you look at that!"?????

[Dane]

In that case I apologize. To the rest, please read.

IOW, read that sammy doesn't have the courage to ping me.

But what the hey, I can understand, you are just following your boss Terry MaCauliffe's lead.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Thank you, but I will hazard a guess that you are not nearly as proud of it as I am.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"How about upholding the law of the land"

What law would that be?

The "private industry is not allowed to hire who they want" law?

Or is it the "private industry can't do business outside the U.S." law?

And if Congress passes a law enabling more people to come here and work for prtivate companies, then that IS the law of the land, enacted as proscribed by the Constitution.

What exact law are you talking about that places industry under the control of the government, and which restricts it to do only that which it sees as being beneficial to the society?

BTW, the sentence above is nearly the textbook definition of "socialism".

[Luis Gonzalez]

He was sitting around one day, munching on some mushrroms he found on the side of the road, when an old Indian appeared out of nowhere and led him on a journey of self-discovery.

Or maybe he just realized that he looked a lot like this guy, and that was why he'd been receiving residual checks from old reruns of "F Troop".

[Chad Fairbanks]

Ya know, I shouldn't be mean and slam my Indian Brothers, but all that talk about standing up to the oppressor and fighting for freedom and to make things better etc... is apparently for OTHER people - The Apache fought for a while, but decided one day to just up and surrender to the "oppressor" and get shunted to reservations.

I equate that to be basically the same circumstances as what people fleeing other nations are facing - so either it was the smart thing to do, or it was the cowardly thing to do. Wonder what he'd say it is?