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.

Then again, flat earthers usually aren't very aware of their surroundings. You're forgiven.

Did your parents boink your head into solid objects when you were young?

This is the infamous Ilbay. He's a big time Yassar Arafat supporter who has stated that he hopes the the flat-earth Palestinians win against Israel and accused me of lying on this thread 3 times, even though I explained to him that FR was having a problem with posts unintentionally coming up in "breaking news" and that I immediately alerted the mods when this one happend to come up there.

He hit the abuse button after JR already posted several times on this thread and had decided to leave it in the breaking news sidebar. My question about his parents boinking his head was a serious one.

M2C, you made poo-poo in your dipey again!

If you go back and read My2cents posts, he had gotten very personal very quickly with me and with others. Hence the response.

Every single one of those (yes down to the last one) were to people who were engaged in either flaming me or another poster personally. Not one was in response to anyone who was engaged in an intellectual debate. I treat jackasses like the jackasses they are. Which brings me to my next jackass.

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.

I've quit responding to the southhack poster. I think he might be a child. I'm not being sarcastic, we may have been arguing with an actual kid, which would explain a lot.

These were all in response to YOU. The same idiot who alone literally declared himself the winner of a debate because his argument was quote; "superior", even though all of the 20 people he was arguing with found that utterly laughable. Who states "I am a diehard fan of the U.S. Constitution" in one breath then shills for the obscene Patriot Act in the next.

You yourself stated that you were 12 years old to another poster, so I don't know why you would have a problem with others believing it.

"Because a person may be honestly uncomfortable with large government programs promoted by this administration they're "paranoid", "whiners" and all kinds of other derogatory names."

I stand by that statement, I was telling the truth. This poster was being personal with intellectually honest people without cause.

You can shill, propagandize and try to dis-context issues all you want, unfortunately there are people who are able to think clearly, that realize you for the "hack" you are in your own namesake.

Anyone who reads this thread with any degree of honesty will see that. It's comforting to know that they will be available for a long time and that truth speaks louder than spin (or stupidity).

I will like to thank you for bumping this post so often in your attempt to piss into the wind.

"You yourself stated that you were 12 years old to another poster..."

No, another poster said that I was 12 and I merely quoted his words at a later point to humble him. He hasn't been back that I've noticed, either.

Also, I'm fine with bumping your thread. I thought when you posted it that you were being open minded and were ready for a legitimate debate. I'm not as convinced of that fact now as I was back then, but I am still giving you the benefit of the doubt.

I replayed a few of your disparaging remarks because you were hammering on Vets_somebody for making similar comments, and the irony just combined with the hypocrisy to demand a response.

Now I realize that you think that the Patriot Act is unConstitutional in contrast to my own view, but that neither justifies your disparaging comments to me nor supports your contention with logic or facts.

I've cited examples, analogies, and the text of the Constitution at various points in time to show that the Patriot Act is legal. The email searching/wiretapping being a major case in point on this thread alone.

I haven't seen you do the same, even though I'm made it very obvious that I want SPECIFICS from you (e.g. what right have you lost).

So yes, it would be difficult to conclude anything except that I've smashed your claims into oblivion in this debate so far.

But I'm still open to hearing you out and giving you more chances to explain and substantiate your claims (presuming that you don't go overboard calling me a kid or on heroin too many more times).

Heck, I've been wrong before. Show me where you've been physically denied a specific right (e.g. to vote) or where the text of the Patriot Act unavoidably violates the Constitution and you'll have made a convert (presuming that it holds up to my counter arguments, at least).

But you aren't alone. None of your supporters have managed to nail the specifics, either.

In all of your poorly written, unibomber-esque posts you've said alomst nothing except to insult everyone who disagrees with you.

Before judging the grammar of others, I suggest you consider a spell check! I might point out..since you critique my grammar.. is unibomber-esque in Websters?? I think not...(ROFL) :o)

"We just haven't supplanted our conservative philosophy with hero worship. Many of us find many good qualities in GWB and haven't given up on him, but we realize that all leaders must be scrutinized"

WE?? Hmmm,.. interesting choice of words. In my college psychology courses we would have had a hayday with that one!! (I do not profess to have a degree in Psychology.. just studied it). Througout your responses to me and others, I've found you have a propensity to speaking in the collective "we". Just found that interesting...

Hero worship?? How about realizing the huge responsibility given him by the "times" that this President has faced? How about admitting that there is "way more" to "governing" a Nation than all these/you self appointed experts seem to realize. It has ONLY been a year for crying out loud. You can't seem to admit where attitudes like yours don't help the situation.. but further the agenda of Democrats who would LOVE to recapture the Whitehouse, do you? So quick to judge.. such an expert. Now thats "pathological". Under the circumstances he has surpassed my wildest dreams in his abilities.

You crack-heads called a state delegate who has been active in the GOP for over 30 YEARS insulting names.

Crack-heads?? I think debate is fine,.even fun. But crack-heads? Do you realize what your implying? You would be wrong. But dare anyone disagree with YOU.. and they are crack-heads. Good one!!! Takes one to know one.. nanee nanee boo boo. How sophmoric!!

As to this 30 year delegate, are you saying I should "respect" their opinion? Follow like a sheep what they say is accurate? What a hypocritical statement in light of all you just said. I'm supposed to have more respect for the state delegate because YOU said so? Now who is acting "pathological"? A "state delegate"?? Whoa!!!! I'm impressed. Please, let me know who he/she is, so I can "hero' worship their words. How ridiculous!!! You propose that I should not question the philosophical idealism of this person?? Then you accuse me of hero worship? Now thats rich!! He or she should admit who they are and what their political positions are. See, I don't agree with everyone because they might have an "R" behind their names denoting their political affiliation.

"You talk about the shredding of the bill of rights yet seemingly have no problem with a document that literally does just that by voiding the Forth Amendment"

Voiding?? Get real. That "document" was done so that TERRORIST who would do us harm could be caught. No.. I really have no problem with that "document" under these circumstances. Bleeding heart liberals do (and I think there are a few with an "R" behind their names). Paranoids do.. but no "I don't". I have faith that the Forth Amendment is just fine. That this Administration isn't abusing it..and in fact, that they had a lot of Constitutional Legal experts to consult regarding it. Do you profess to know more than they do? Do you FEAR it? (see above statement pertaining to "paranoid")

I happen to think there "are" elements who fear such a thing. Maybe it will even stop a few dastardly deeds (cowardly deeds). I happen to think it is about time we quit being mamby pamby with criminals and terrorists. Shame on me!!! And gosh.. I trust this President. Guess I'm a "hero" worshiper!!! So be it. The more I replay your words in my mind.. the more I like them. See, I happen to think he just might qualify as a "hero". Hero's save lives. And many of his actions, actions he did quite expediently.. just may have done that.. saved many many lives. Worship?? Now that I save for God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. To do otherwise would be contrary to my beliefs.

"Just admit that you agree with all of the spending and big government initiatives at the top of this post, so the rest of us could consider you intellectually honest. I don't think you have the nads to do that."

Anyone and everyone who KNOWS me in life and from this forum.. knows I would never agree with "everything" ANY President does. That would be contrary to human nature in my opinion. So no.. I don't agree with all the spending. What I disagree with.. is not giving this man more than ONE year to accomplish things. I think he may even have more knowledge about the economy than you or I!! GO FIGURE!!You post a "vanity" with no credentials that I know of to espouse your views, then cry like a baby when anyone disagree's with YOU.

To answer your last witty and remarkably intelligent comment to me: "I don't think you have the nads to do that."

That would be a correct assumption!!! I have NO nads!! Is that intellectually honest enough for you?

FRegards!! (and btw.. I only "ping" when I'm answering a response to ME, or to the "original" poster. So again.. a tad paranoid aren't we? Why would you post and then assume no one would ping you on your OWN thread?) Whew!!! Unreal!!

The Republican party is as much tied to eastern elitist as the DP is to the unions.

The fact you're from Massachusetts, your perspective suffers from the lunacy around you, for which you can be forgiven, but the idea that the Republican Party is tied to the eastern elitist establishment hasn't been true since the GOP nominated Ike in 1956.

Speaking as someone who has lived in California all his life, I just don't see the Republican Party as run by "progressive" easterns. Barry Goldwater mortally wounded the "Eastern establishment," and by the time Ronald Reagan was elected President, the so-called "Eastern establishment" had become nominally conservative. (I'm talking national Republican politics, not regional, per se.) By 1984, all Republicans in every region of the country were "Reaganites."

GHW Bush, while labeled a "patrician", was nominated because he was Reagan's Veep. When he tried to break from Reaganism, he lost. GW Bush is hardly beholden to the "Eastern elite." The GOP leaders in Congress are all from non-eastern regions: Mississippi, Oklahoma, Texas, Illinois...

Frankly, if the Eastern elite ran the Republican Party, the 2000 ticket would have been Chris Shays/Peter King.

I happen to agree with every statement you've made in this thread. Well put!! I know a lot of people shy away from arguing in threads like this. You only see replies from "like minded" people. The kind of diatribe spouted by some on this thread "has" been radical. Thats my opinion.

An opinion I formed from observing simular behavior for years in this forum. Usually the same people. I never agreed with their views long ago..and remain true to my ethics to this day. I find them radical and dangerous.

Any who would "dare" disagree with the "premise" of this thread..(which by the authors own accord could be considered "Bush bashing") has been called names and belittled for it.

Not surprizingly,.. the radical "annie get your gun" types and the "big bad Government" types came out in droves.

They never could offer up an alternative idea. One that would work better. Then they avoided legitimate questions.

Land of "fiction", There is no "is" to it.. "thats hollywood" kind of post. Not unlike "the twilight zone" ;o) In other words.. "unreal".

But seriously.. thanks for stating things as well as you did. You can give "your 2 cents" for me any day!!!

FRegards!!

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.