George Bush's Big Government Adventure

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.

Well, he went on to do a 'few' good things, as Dubya will do.

If just one of those things was to even start to shrink government, or even to seriously propose it, I would be happy. I will applaud the good things he does and reserve the right to criticize what I disagree with.

I never said he had to do everything I want, but it isn't anywhere in his plans to go even in the direction I want. He doesn't just go along with big government schemes, he proposes them himself. That, is the wrong direction. I oppose that, and as long as he does that I oppose him, and the Republican Party as it is now composed. I'll say it again; Bush and the Republican Party are part of the problem, not the solution to it.

I just believe if Conservatives persevere, and stop with the bickering every damn time something doesn't go their way, then conservatives can finally gain a sustaining majority in both Houses, which from the ideas of free enterprise, a strong & an ever-vigilant national defense can upheld and hopefully become pandemic.

As you might have guessed, I'm not in favor of "conservative" politics as now defined, so I have no interest in them gaining anything.

I'm in favor of liberty and constitutional government, not what we have now. I will continue to work toward that goal.

Well, contrary to what some people might be saying on this thread, I am pretty happy with Bush to this point, and I am personally committing myself to doing whatever I can to help restore the Republican majority in the Senate and increasing the majority in the House. In the coming election cycle, I would like to replace as many Democrats as we possibly can, nationally and locally. There is no way that we can win back the freedom that has been stolen from us if we allow the liberal Democrats to continue running the government, and there is no way we can do anything by sitting on the sidelines. I'm not saying I love all of the new and or expanded programs being promoted by the administration, however, I am not about to bail out on him either. This website, and most of its membership, worked damned hard to get him elected and we are now going to do all we possibly can to give him a majority in Congress. I'm not always happy with some of the Republicans, but I guarantee you I have a helluva lot more confidence in them than I do in the corrupt/socialist Democrats. With a strong conservative majority, we should get more conservative judges, then we can seriously work on cutting programs, taxes, etc., and getting rid of some of the unconstitutional laws and agencies. I can guarantee you that with a Democrat controlled Senate, the liberal/activist judiciary will continue to expand. Elect more conservatives locally and nationally and retake the judiciary. This will take time, but it's the only way to take it back. IMHO

"He's not a conservative working for a more free and constitutional republic. I'm not sure what he is but he's certainly not that."

Well, I see the situation a bit differently. I noticed that GWB told the UN "gun trafficking" bureaucracy to stuff it. To me, that's standing up for national soveriegnty and our Constitution.

I watched GWB remove the ABA from vetting federal judges before they came to Congress. Again, to me that's standing up for the proper Constitutional separation of powers.

I listened as GWB told Congress "No" to a national ID card. I watched as GWB signed into law a bill that PROHIBITED government from stopping pilots from arming themselves on commercial flights.

I saw that GWB followed through on his campaign promise to lower taxes even though the opposition said that tax cuts were dead on arrival. I saw EPA CO2 regulations repealed and OSHA home-office regulations killed by GWB.

I'm currently watching as GWB and VP Cheney are standing up for our Constitution by refusing to cowtow to GAO demands and Congressional requests for private Executive Office meeting notes, even though the "political" thing to do would be to release those notes because there is no chance that anything is wrong in them.

I've seen that GWB stood up for the Constitution's assignment of military matters to the Executive Branch by assuring that war prisoners would have military tribunals instead of civil trials under the Judicial Branch, much to the chagrin of trial lawyers everywhere.

Do we have a MORE free America today than before GWB took office? Yes. Specifically, ask the pilots who are now training to arm themselves on commercial flights. That opportunity was never there before GWB.

In contrast, no one on this thread has been able to name a specific freedom that they've lost to the federal government since GWB took office.

That makes it pretty clear to me that you are mistaken to claim that GWB isn't working towards a more Constitutional and free America. There just isn't any tangible evidence of what you claim, versus the tangible evidence that I alone have provided to the contrary.

Thus, there is no question about who is correct in this debate.

Did you catch that GWB refused to contribute to peacekeepers in Afghanistan? Notice that there can be a Constitutional difference between peacekeeping in foreign lands and defending our nation abroad.

Did you witness GWB use his Constitutional power of recess appointments to place very conservative appointees into office?

Are you not pleased with GWB's foreign and domestic handling of our war on terrorists? Do you disagree with President Bush's plan to privatize social security?

In this house.. we honor President Bush. We are trying to research and understand his policies.(Bold mine)

They were your words not mine.

This is what I answered;
"you don't know about his policies or you wouldn't have to research them. And if you don't understand them maybe you should pay more attention on this board and stop cheerleading until you do."

How is that ignorant?

Do you just print out his policies and go.. "Oh gol darn.. I hate that.. gonna go protest right now!!!",.. or do you perhaps try to look into the long term effect of those policies.

I understand the long term effects of his policies, which is precisely why I oppose them.

What others (besides just Libertarians) think of them? Or do you just keep exposing your own agenda, like a mind numbed robot?

My agenda is clear, I have stated it on this thread many times, and elsewhere on this site for years. I don't hide my views and the "Rushie" robot comment is pretty descriptive of your "anyone but Clinton" views. If you don't know what to say, call Rush, he will tell you what to think and say.

What I was implying was so simple it just sailed right over your head.

It sure went over my head, please explain it, this time in a comprehensible way.

RE: #523

God Bless you Jim.. Thanks for clearing this up for me. I'm in total agreement with your post.

I said the other day, I probably will never agree with every single thing "any" President does (such is human nature). But this President is doing an awesome job..and I know I wouldn't want to be in his shoes. (Hard to walk in them during these times!!) I'm trying to study up on, and see where his positions will lead. Upon first appearance,.. some of the issues he is pursuing seem contrary to my beliefs. I do not profess to have any special knowledge that would allow me to forsee the direction of the agenda's he is proposing. But from what I have read/and I'm reading.. he may just be getting this right!! In a multitude of ways!!! He stated before he took office that the economy was in a mess..and it is. I'm glad he had the foresight to mention it!! Fixing it is extremely complicated..and will take some time and ingenuity. I want to give him the benefit of the doubt. I can't imagine he is going to let anyone ruin his legacy. I think he is going to show everyone.. that he AND his father, actually got it right. We really need for him to have the full 8 years to achieve this.

Thanks a lot for clarifying your positions. It's what I thought.

Relieved Freeper!!

You exist at the very, very fringe of the political spectrum.

This is an interesting comment because it shows just how far the Republican Party has drifted to the left in the last 30 some years. Just about every item on AAABEST’s list of what Bush is proposing (or signed into law) would have been considered "fridge left" a few decades ago. Today to be against this agenda is to be "fringe right". I just wonder what might be on a list like this in 20 years. Given the way events have been unfolding would we be arguing about a proposal to “officially” suspend the application of U.S. Federal law to the state of CA because the state has their own system of national governance in place and they, well, haven't followed U.S. laws for years? I ask you, is it fringe right to believe that the U.S. Government should abide by our Constitutional principles? To many in the GOP I think the answer is YES.

Triple A since you are on the board, am I ever going to get a reply to reply #221?

Uh, I've told you before that the reason I've been ignoring you is because every time I try to reason and intellectually debate with you, you get st00pit on me. So I've been ignoring you as a lot of people have.

I don't dislike you, it's just a huge pain in the nads having a ratioinal conversation with you. I'll put that aside one more time.

LOL, you got snookered by the AP. In AP terms the $71.5 billion it "costs", is the "cost"(i.e lost revenue) to the federal treasury due to the tax credits.

That's not so. It's not only lost revenue tax credits to tax payers.

Like last year, it will be available to people who don't owe federal taxes -- typically people with very low incomes.

In other words, more sponges getting free money for doing nothing.

More from the article:

$3.2 billion allocated to the Children's Health Insurance Program

This is the approach to helping the uninsured that Democrats generally prefer....Conservatives typically prefer a free-market approach.

$114 million for community health centers, bringing the total to $1.5 billion, an 8 percent increase over this year's appropriation.

$350 million to continue Medicaid coverage for families that have recently left welfare.

I humbly apologize if the way the link was posted was mislead you, it was honestly unintended. I will agree, in hindsight it could have been worded better. Your point is well taken.

OK, I've been nice, are we back to honest debate now, or are you still a member of my goofball list?

....but when I think of Al Gore as President I thank God for GWB.

That's exactly how the Insiders want you to feel. It's like hating the thought of a straight-jacket so much, that you're thankful for the handcuffs. In the process, they want you to give up on the idea of liberation. When the time is right, the Insiders will sell GWB as the straight-jacket and someone else as the handcuffs. Liberation, however, is absolutely out of the question. Unless, of course, you're prepared to take the risk of travelling down the road our Forefathers did.

After years of trying to get relief by working through the colonial legislature, petitioning the king and agitating through civil disobedience, they resigned themselve to declare this:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

I don't think we're quite there yet and I would be loathe to let loose the first salvo, but we're not as far off as one might think. It all depends on how fast things move. The frogs have almost drifted off to sleep, time to crank up the kettle. Who will wake up in time?

#527 ... Great post!!!

The only thing I'm unsure of (to date),... is the plan to privatize social security. I'm not so sure a Social Security "Investment" plan in a free market, and after seeing what we have recently with the Stock Market (for a couple years now really) is a good idea. I freely admit, I need to research it more. But it is the major thing we probably disagree with our President about.. that and immigration policies, though I saw some things I did like recently by our President. Which is causing me to pause..and take a little better wait and see approach with regard to his policies. He may be getting things right more than even I give him credit for!!

We feel that Social Security would have been just fine, had the politicians NOT dipped into it all these years. If it had been left alone..it and the concept of it, would have continued to prosper and serve those who paid into it all these years. It was, and still is, the best idea. The problem is the Government needs to stick to its promises!! The Social Security issue is akin to what they did to Vets who retired with the "promise" of free life long health care for them and their spouses if they served 20 or more years. We already renegged on that. And I hate to see us take anything away from Social Security,..as people have paid into it..and once you start to take it away.. its a slippery slope. I mean.. what "if" the stock markets crash..and a person is disabled for life? What then? Will they EVER be able to retire and know the American dream?? That concerns me.

I certainly don't profess to have the answers.. but I do have questions :o)

OK, I've been nice, are we back to honest debate now, or are you still a member of my goofball list?

Yep no problem. Below is the passage from the AP article where you got your "71.5 billion for government health care" as part of your "disappointment" about President Bush. Now take a look at it.

Conservatives typically prefer a free-market approach, which would have families choose their own health insurance packages in the open market. Bush's plan, first made when he was running for president and included in his budget last year, will offer tax breaks to help pay often-steep premiums.

This year's proposal will be essentially unchanged and worth up to $1,000 per person or $2,000 per couple, according to an administration official speaking on condition of anonymity. Like last year, it will be available to people who don't owe federal taxes -- typically people with very low incomes.

Last year's proposal, which was phased in over a number of years, set the income limit at $30,000 in adjusted gross income for individual tax filers and $60,000 for married couples.

The plan's cost was estimated at $71.5 billion over 10 years.

LINK

As you can see the AP beleives that this program will "cost" $71.5 billion in the next ten years and like I stated before the liberal AP writers believe than any money not going to the treasury(due to tax credits) is a "cost" to the the treasury.

I just pointed out this fact about AP writers. I have no idea if you were naive about the the AP's writer's liberal bias or if you directly misled people. It is up to the people who read this thread to make up thier own minds.

There just isn't any tangible evidence of what you claim, versus the tangible evidence that I alone have provided to the contrary.

Thus, there is no question about who is correct in this debate.

LOL!

OK you're right. You "alone" win the debate since you "alone" have proclaimed there is "no question about who is correct".

Happy? I'll be sure to tell everyone who thinks you're on angel dust, herion, crack and LSD (at the same time) that you've declared yourself victorious and it's time to stop the debate now.

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.