Posted on 06/05/2002 1:20:54 PM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
And, Vermonters Jim Jeffords and Patrick Leahy 'screwed the pooch' with regards to half of Congress and the Judiciary.
So, we are 'stuck' until the people decide in November whether they want to move right, move left, or stay on the 'left-tilting' slope in the middle.
Give me one example of a 'blessing' that will accrue to Bush if he 'presses' conservative issues without hope of clearing the Senate. It's up to 'We, the people', not, he, the President, to 'choose' the direction available for Bush to move legislation. Without the votes, Congress and media will play 'rope-a-dope' until the Bush clock runs out, and then blame him for lack of accomplishment.
You're beautiful when you're angry. HA!
Please explain to me, O Enlightened One, where it says the president MUST sign any bill that he disagrees with; that his hands are tied? Please explain this concept to me.
GWB decried CFR on the campaign trail, then made jokes to the press about how quickly he would sign it.
But I guess he had no choice. Am I to understand that this is what you're saying?
You must be talking about the Paleo-losers...
Preach it, brother!
I'm 6' 6" tall. Are you?
6'3"
I can do a 360-degree slam dunk. Can you?
Um....I can usually hit the backboard from 10 feet, does that count?
I can hit a golf ball 340-yards down the fairway consistently. Can you?
Only if the ball has little JATO bottles mounted on it.
You probably are capable of doing things that I could only dream of.
I can troubleshoot a MIL-STD-188C Mode I circuit in twenty seconds while telling that really tasteless joke about Osama bin Laden, the camel, and the edible burkha.
Or as my grandma would say, "The fox is guarding the henhouse."
Let's see some QUOTES from Bush decrying CFR.
Unfortunately, several hundred thousand won't do much good. It will take several million.
And no, not a cynic; I'm a 'real cynic no more'!
Having said that, I think Rush Limbaugh hit it right on the head yesterday concerning the Bush agenda and strategy:
"The White House thinks their strategy is working like a charm and, really, who could argue with them? Their strategy is not to really spell out their own agenda and fight for it no matter what. Their strategy is to advance a centrist agenda that consists of a sizable percentage of the left's agenda, issue by issue. In the process, they're picking off Democrat votes. They're doing two things. They're denying Democrats issues to run on, and at the same time giving specific members of the Democrat coalition reasons to vote for Bush or against the Democrat candidates. The way they're looking at it, it's working."
I think those who have pledged their undying allegiance to President Bush are very happy with this. To them winning isn't the most important thing, it's the only thing. They are quite content with a "centrist" agenda/president and are quite willing to accept a great percentage of the left's agenda if it means 80% approval ratings and winning elections.
Unfortuneately, they are in the vast majority in the GOP at the present time and so they have earned their victory. Still, constitutional conservatives should be vigilant in holding the President's feet to the fire on important issues. When they do, their patriotism should not be questioned.
I doubt that this will happen. When you are governor of a state, like Clinton was, you have the power to rape a woman and pay no consequences. You have the power to extort cash in exchange for political appointments with no consequences. And you have the power to influence medical examiners to get any outcome you wish to an autopsy. As President he was much more visible but also more powerful.
I don't think our nation has an adequate way to stop such people if they are supported by a majority. I have a neighbor who is so illogical and fearful of the unknown that she can be influenced easily with propaganda. There is no way to convince her of anything to which the liberal media has not agreed. I would be satisfied if I could just find a way to distract her from going to the polls on election day.
Destroying the liberal media must be the goal and must be accomplished prior to any expectations of holding Clinton or any other powerful criminal accountable.
Oh! How smug of you! How trite! How juvenile! You'd have fared better by not even answering me back seeing that you didn't refute what I said at all.
You're talking to a Born-Again Christian, yet say the Ten Commandments somehow don't have the force of law to me (needless to say that Christ already took care of that for me)? Puh-leeze!
One word for ya, pahtnah... CHECKMATE.
Gee,..and he did all that while defending our Nation as our President. He has managed to be there for the troops, for the victims and survivors of our worst attack in our history. He IS working for our security every day,..but some people seem to think he is smoking cigars and banging on bongos. Not to mention all the hot spots in the world (are these people who write this kind of dribble watching ANY news media outlets??), that were left abandoned as far as any kind of Foreign Policy under Clintoon. We have a HUGE mess to contend with. Do ya think maybe the President is hugely busy trying to undo the friggin mess left by Clintoon!!
Just "HOW" do people think the job could be better done than this President is doing it? Name a person who could do it better. Idea's. Not just some whining "I'm so mad because he isn't doing things just the way I want" rant!
I don't agree with every single thing a President does, never will. Goes against human nature. But good grief.... this borders on totally insane. Akin to shooting oneself in ones own foot!!!
God Bless this President!!! I hope he is in office for a very long time. I PRAY we will have a Republican Senate, so we can truly get things done. (Do ya think the people writing this crap, realize he is up against Sen. DASH-hole?)
An old saying "With friends like this, who needs enemies" comes to mind.
Go figure... sheesh!
Yeah, I used it TWICE in general terms.
So you bark out insulting names and then decry when someone responds to you in kind. Childish, indeed.
I'm quite happy discussing the issues, but I'm not going to sit still when atacked or insulted. Go back and read the thread, I didn't open the can of worms. And I didn't address you at all.
OBTW, since I support the second amendment, am pro-life, for tax cuts, school vouchers, home schooling, reduced gov't, privatization of some gov't functions, abolishment of some civil service rules, right-to-work laws, and haven't voted for a Democrat in at least a dozen years, how exactly does that make me a CINO? Please explain.
I know you do. I didn't refer to you and I didn't address you until this post.
But let's stop right there. Either:
1) Bush disagreed with CFR and signed it (which reinforces my point), OR
2) Bush agrees with CFR.
It's a no-win situation. Do you see that?
Ouch...I wouldn't spread that around if I were a Bushbot.
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.