George Bush's Big Government Adventure

Free Republic and Various ^ | 01-30-02 | aaabest

[AAABEST]

With Conservative Like This, Who Needs Liberals?

Let me start off by addressing those who have been bashing(and I do mean bash) me and other well intentioned and well known Freepers as being anti-Bush, Libertarians, from the reform party or whatever. 

I voted for GWB, and I can ping several freepers to this thread that met me in real life at several Bush rallies (with megaphone in hand). I was a member of the Broward County Young Republicans before moving to the West coast of Florida and I was active in Jeb Bush's campaign for Governor. 

I've been on this forum for almost 4 years and anyone that knows me is aware of my conservative views and knows that I'm not a member of the reform party, I'm not a Libertarian (large "l") or any of the other things I and others like me have been accused of.

If you have been engaging in inflammatory rhetoric, bashing long-time, well known Freepers or acting like children because not all of us are enthralled with "Georges Big Government Adventure",  please try to control yourselves, at least while posting on this thread. 

It's not my purpose (at least at this point) to get GWB un-elected, I like him, he has a beautiful wife, he's a good Commander in Chief and he seems like an honest politician. However,  if he keeps ignoring conservative principles and promoting a larger more intrusive government, I and others can no longer continue to support him....on principle. 

We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America.

Above is the Free Republic mission statement.  After his first year, would anyone say that GWB has worked towards this end? I think many conservatives suffer from some kind of Stockholm Syndrome as a result of 8 years of President Clinton, because when I ask many of them what GWB has done for conservatism lately, all I get is that he's not Clinton. 

I know he's not a corrupt, law breaking scoundrel, but is that all that's required? Can our republic survive a cycle where Republicans get into office grow government greatly, interspersed with Democrats who grow government even more greatly with little or no reduction? There are actually people on FR that think all of this growth in government spending is some grandiose 8 year plan by Mr. Bush to fool Democrats so that he can cut government later. What an absurd notion.

If any of the initiatives below originated from the Clinton administration, people on FR would have had a cow. Those "Day in the Life of President Bush" threads garner hundreds of fawning responses, while a thread on how our government is growing out of control will die after 10.

I appeal to anyone reading this to consider the below information without bias. The links will open in a separate window for you convenience.  I will be adding to this information as necessary God bless America, God bless this forum and God bless you.

Click on the Picture of the President (thinking of new ways grow government) for the corresponding article.

	Huge education spending bill (i.e. Federal Local School Board Bribery Act) which liberal Democrats love that doesn't mention a word about choice or local control.
	Food stamps for immigrants.
	Largest spending bill in American History. The first to exceed 2 trillion dollars.
	The Airport Security Bill that completely takes control of over 28,000 screening jobs. Now it seems that they don't even have to be high school graduates either. The big difference, they can't be fired.
	100 million for welfare moms.
	Hugely Expanding Clinton's Amercorps boondoggle that all conservatives railed against.
	Kowtowing to law breaking illegal immigrants by proposing amnesty. Speaking of illegal immigrants who sneak across the border; "And we've got to respect that, seems like to me, and treat those people with respect," he added. "I remind people all across our country: Family values do not stop at the border."
.	38 Billion for a new Homeland Security bureaucracy that allots a 20% increase for border control. Guess what. It goes to our problematic Canadian border, with not a dollar spent on the Mexican border. Read it for yourself
	The  Orwellian "Patriot Act" that gives Federal authorities carte blanche to rifle through all of your digital communications and essentially,  rob your house without notice.
	71.5 billion over 10 years for government health care.
	Not releasing appropriate documents on Clinton and FBI corruption.

 

[MileHi]

I've hit the abuse button.

Abuse yourself...

[Goetz_von_Berlichingen]

"I'd prefer a military dictatorship to a Hilary dictatorship anyday."

In his 18 January column, Paul Craig Roberts wrote:

"Every year, the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., publishes an Index of Economic Freedom . . . according to objective measures Chile is one of the freest countries. Yet, that country's economic and political institutions are entirely the product of reforms implemented by the "tyrant" Gen. Pinochet. Obviously, the demonization of Pinochet is not supported by the facts."

So military dictatorship can work.

Unfortunately, it probably wouldn't work here. With the possible exception of the USMC, the past several administrations have insured that the upper reaches of the military hierarchy are populated by politically correct yes-men. While military dictatorship might be feasible in a country whose top soldiers have not been housebroken by leftist lawyers and feminists, such an arrangement in the U.S. would most likely result in more Wacos, Ruby Ridges, and Elian snatchings.

[Mortimer Snavely]

As distasteful as it is, when the country is under attack, it is necessary to support the government. The phrase "loyal opposition" comes to mind.

[WindMinstrel]

As distasteful as it is, when the country is under attack, it is necessary to support the government.

Why?

The phrase "loyal opposition" comes to mind.

You misuse that phrase. "Loyal opposition" is the theory that it's ok to disagree with your opponents -- that just because you disagree with them doesn't mean they're evil. The phrase "loyal opposition" means it's ok to dissent -- not to discourage it.

[FreeReign]

I see not one person has provided an answer to my question back in post #72. PLEASE NAME ONE PROGRAM BUSH HAS PROPOSED TO ELIMINATE OR EVEN CUT?

The following department budgets have been cut in Bush's discretionary 2002 budget: The Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, HHS, HUD, Interior, International Affairs, Justice, Labor, Transportation, Treasury, Vet Affairs, Core of Engineers, EPA, FEMA, Nat. Sci. Foundation, Small Business Administration, and SSA. If there any other important questions I can answer for you, please don't hesitate to ask.

[2Trievers]

BTTT Triple A

[FreeReign]

But you left out his federalizing of the Churches (Faith-Based Initiative)

How so?

You can do some research on it, but here is an overview. All 501c3(tax exempt)/"registered" Churches are restricted by federal regulations from participating in "political issues". Up until Bush's Faith-based initiative, there were lots of "unregistered" Churches. But the new law makes it very difficult to continue to be unregistered. It essentially forces all Churches to register and become 501c3 Churches - controlled by the government - so they won't oppose the government on abortion, our God-given unalienable rights, or any other issue. Most believe that the First Amendment prevents the government from issuing any regulations concerning Churches. However, the politicians in DC don't know any constitutional restrictions.

Oh, I've already done some research on this subject and your conclusions don't match mine. So I then ask you how the F-B Initiative federalizes churches and your answer is esentially -- more chrches would have to be registered because it would be difficult for them not to be and therefor they are forced to register.

That's a non answer -- you've made not point.

[ridensm]

Thanks

[Protagoras]

Judge GWB after he has served eight years.

I've seen enough, you stay with the ship. And don't forget to stay near the band, I hear they play all the way down.

[headsonpikes]

Perhaps Illy would be happier if the FR moderators were federalized.

That way 'terrorist posts', like the one heading this thread, could not sneak in under cover of darkness.

FR's too important to be left to the private sector.(facetious post)

[KirkandBurke]

Bush 1/Clinton/Bush 2. One unified government, three executives. All of it staged and orchestrated like a WWF show. It only looks like fighting.

"The chief problem of American political life for a long time has been how to make the two Congressional parties more national and international. The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shift in policy...."

A quote from the book "TRAGEDY AND HOPE" by Carroll Quigley on page 1247:

[annalex]

Right on. Thanks.

[AshleyMontagu]

At least Bush has taken on the abortion issue for all the pro-lifers who voted for him. Just like Reagan and his dad did.

[Protagoras]

I see you've attracted some of the 6% of the country that didn't like Bush's speech to your sandbox.

Most of the lemmings jump off the cliff. Ya'll have a nice trip down.

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

This is a cool, calm, collected presentation of the facts. The effort you took in the physical presentation of the post is also impressive.

I will, cassandra-like, make a few predictions: The so-called "conservative movement"--which was always chimeral anyway--will be completely scattered to the four winds by the Bush Presidency. Confusion will reign and infighting will be the order of the day.

Bush will be a one-term president--like his father--who, as we all remember, enjoyed a 90% approval rating during the crusade to save the Kuwait monarchy.

The Presidential campaign--which is a virtually constant activity now--will feature a desperate bid by the Republican Elite to enlarge the tent while, at the same time, counting on the "base" to take another one "for the team". There will be many signals sent to the effect that the base "has nowhere else to go".

The "base" will respond--finally--by going nowhere. They will stay home in record numbers. The election itself will show the smallest voting percentage in history. Except in the inner cities where voter fraud will reach epic proportions as the Democrats overplay their hand in an effort to avoid another hanging chad debacle.

General mailaise and cynicism will be the order of the day. So-called "fringe groups" will proliferate with a variety of adgendas. Black Nationalism will grow in popularity. The government will respond by stepping up its efforts to smash "white extremist" groups.

This state of affairs will continue for several more election cycles as a general alienation from the very idea of The United States continues. Government bureaucracy will continue to engorge itself, saprophytically, on the remains of the ever shrinking "middle class".

Slowly, the middle class will become radicalized. The center will prove to be hollow and will not hold.

The falcon, no longer heeding the falconer, will--do what, I wonder?

[blackie]

Re # 138, I got my nickname in the 9th grade, I had a well greased duck's butt hair cut and my (I had some then) hair was almost black and the nick stuck.I'm a male and a 1/4 Cherokee, no Blackfoot blood... :o)

[Protagoras]

Appearently you would feel much better if Bush declared himself Dictator for life.

I have few doubts that he could be elected to that position if the election for it were held today.

[ArGee]

I have to admit, although I liked much in his speech, Bush was clearly wearing a liberal skin during his SoU Address. Or should that be SOUEEEEEE address? There was plenty of "the government must fix things" to keep the Democrats applauding (except when he rubbed the Senate's nose in the fact that they were obstructionist).

I was not happy to see that at all. Of course, the proof is in the actual spending, but I am not presuming it will go well.

Shalom.

[blackie]

Your tears are making the traction slippery...