Posted on 03/13/2002 2:47:41 PM PST by Michael2001
Well I'm mad and I'm angry, and maybe that's why I can't think of an appropriate response. While all of us were prasing him for how he was dealing with the war on terror, Bush passes this Amnesty Bill, something that not even the sneaky Bill Clinton would do. This is one of the worse Bills to pass through Congress, it will hurt us in many ways, and ten years from now we will still be feeling it's effects.
Bush has, without a doubt in my mind, sold us out for the Hispanic vote. He sold us out because he can take our vote for granted (who will we vote for Al Gore?). Is he wrong? What do we do when the Republicans stop looking out for our interests? Is it time for a new party, or do we work within the party and try to root out the Republicans In Name Only (of which there are many)?
You're very welcome, that's why Bush as a conservative is way more dangerous than Billy C. the liberal. Because Bush is not governing as a 'Constitutional republican' but as a pragmatic conservative, the abuses that this board's conservatives just fall in love with (because they promote their pet projects), will be used as a bullwhip for their future slavery. Pragmatic conservatives trade votes to get what they want instead of returning to Constitutional principles. When the next regime comes in, vote trading will be the status quo. Who cares if CFR violates the Constitution and the politician's oaths of office? It's the way Repubs and Dems do things.
Clinton was a socialist screw worm and very offensive, most of us know that. However, having said that, I don't think Clinton is the issue here.
You think Bush is the issue with the problems you mentioned?????
I have seen the enemy. It is us. For if we fail to speak out against treachery committed in our midst, we have become the problem not the solution.
As a thirty-two year Republican until the year 2000, I must ask people to please, please, please, take a look at what we have become if we are willing to support men the likes of which have passed some of the recent ominious legislation.
Mr. President, you swore an oath. So did our Congressman and Senators. If you and they are unwilling to abide by that oath, step down.
If you wish to work on behalf of the United Nations, the nation of Mexico or any other, step down now and persue your desires. I will wish you well. But when it comes to our own nation, we deserve to have a man represent and uphold our Constitution, our sovereignty and our borders.
In light of Bush's actions, I cannot support him in his efforts to serve another four years. IMO the least we should accept is a person who will abide by the Constitution. Hell, they swear to do so. How can we possibly fail to swear to make sure they do so?
I was told that Bush would conform to the Constitution. I was told that he would surprise me. Well, on the former he has surprised me. He's surprised a number of people who voted for him too. In the year 2000 I took a pounding for saying I didn't think Bush would far different than a warmed over Democrat. Well, I think it's time for those who promised otherwise to step up to the plate and demand that we replace him with someone who is more like what we were promised Bush would be.
It's time to clean house!
I do not think Clinton/Gore in office would be better. President Bush has, I believe, far greater personal integrity then either. He is doing an excellent job leading the nation in war.
However, I want conservative candidates to vote conservatively and I do think people can still make a difference. Last year 245i passed the house with only 43 NO votes.
This time Republican representatives voted against this measure 123-92.
Until now, the dems would forge ahead with changing the nation to a socialist state with the Repubs simply going into a holding pattern until the next dem was elected. Now, both the dems and Repubs are going full-steam ahead.
Anyone who thinks that there is such a thing as a "New World Order" and that Republicans are for a socialist state and ripping up the constitution are effing nuts for as far as I am concerned.
Bush is the most conservative president ever, (yes, more so than Reagan) and he needs more Republicans elected so that he can enact his agenda, especially in the US Senate.
JimRob is right, you people gave us eight years of Clinton. It is going to take a lot longer than 13 months to fix the damage he did to our country.
So I say to all of the brigadiers, crawl back under your rock and let the REAL conservatives like Bush do their jobs.
EBUCK
Lets not shoot ourselves in the foot!!!!
Mike
Hah! Right. Now I'm with you. Vote for Hillary to continue the Clinton era of prosperity.
I'm sorry, I have to correct you here.
Sliced bread isn't that good. It's better when you get the whole loaf and tear off chunks yourself.
I understand the point you are making... the Republican party being formed to endorse (in general) anti-slavery and free land. The Whigs went away, but the Dems stayed. The current two party system has been entrenched for over a century and people's perceptions are pretty much stuck in viewing our system in this manner. Some may refer to them as "sheep", but so what? Tough turtles, because that's the way things are. A more realistic way to promote change is to alter the Republican party from within rather than try to take the more "likely to fail" route IMHO.
EBUCK
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.