Posted on 06/18/2002 9:57:13 AM PDT by jimkress
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:54:48 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Conservative lawmakers and activists disappointed with President Bush's first 18 months in office are calling into question his tactics and strategy in advancing the conservative agenda.
"The president for the most part has been our guy," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, Texas Republican and a prominent conservative on Capitol Hill. "A few times we disagree."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Your so called stats are wrong baout unemployment figures , as well as the reasoning behinh what you wrote.
The top 30 % income earners, in America are not the super rich. From 30% - 3% is the middle class ; not even the upper middle class !
You're spewing MARXIST PROPAGANDA , and don't even realize it. You're no Conservative . I bet that you want a " living minimum wage " as well as socialized medicine, and all other sorts of goodies for the " poor "; don't you ?
You ignored the simple, well known ( except by you ) , clearly stated facts, that I gave you. Instead all you did was whinge and write falsehoods and crazy things.
A city / town / village has every right ( gaurenteed by the Constitution ) of making laws pertinen to their local, that are stated in the Constitution. You don't like the laws ? Try to get them changed and vote out those who made them. BTW, nost places have laws governing what kind of kousing is allowed to be built where. It isn't illegal, unConstitutional, nor particularly mean.
The Founding Fathers were ALL very wealthy men. They did absolutely nothing to gaurentee the poor that they could live anywhere they wanted to , without the means to.
I type facts ; you type full fledged MARXISM, wild ravings, hyperbole, cant, and drivel.
I refuse to waste any more time refuting the rest of your pathetic garbage.
Your so called stats are wrong baout unemployment figures , as well as the reasoning behinh what you wrote.
The top 30 % income earners, in America are not the super rich. From 30% - 3% is the middle class ; not even the upper middle class !
You're spewing MARXIST PROPAGANDA , and don't even realize it. You're no Conservative . I bet that you want a " living minimum wage " as well as socialized medicine, and all other sorts of goodies for the " poor "; don't you ?
You ignored the simple, well known ( except by you ) , clearly stated facts, that I gave you. Instead all you did was whinge and write falsehoods and crazy things.
A city / town / village has every right ( gaurenteed by the Constitution ) of making laws pertinen to their local, that are stated in the Constitution. You don't like the laws ? Try to get them changed and vote out those who made them. BTW, nost places have laws governing what kind of kousing is allowed to be built where. It isn't illegal, unConstitutional, nor particularly mean.
The Founding Fathers were ALL very wealthy men. They did absolutely nothing to gaurentee the poor that they could live anywhere they wanted to , without the means to.
I type facts ; you type full fledged MARXISM, wild ravings, hyperbole, cant, and drivel.
I refuse to waste any more time refuting the rest of your pathetic garbage.
FYI ... I am NOT " angry " at all, I just don't suffer fools lightly. Don't be " glad ", all you've done, is to prove how abjectly igorant you are.
Your explanation about why you don't find the patriot act troubling explains a lot to me about your satisfaction with things. Are you not a civil libertarian? I have not heard that the reason the government bungled the clues that they did have, was from a lack of power. It appears it was blundering and infighting - from not doing their job.
I followed the patriot act closely before it passed both houses and got signed into law. There were a number of newspaper articles that mentioned that both Ashcroft and Bush wanted no sunsetting. They made this statement when the house and senate were deliberateing on it and trying to add provisions to it. I'm sure I printed some of the articles out and will look for them.
Same with the social spending - it was on Newsmax. I think I've saved that too. Being as I have school tonight and a very busy weekend - it'll be awhile before I can search for the info for you.
Got to run - thanks for your time - have a great day.
Yes, Comrade Stalin Barnacle! We must purge the ideologically impure and the deviationists! All power to Comrade Stalin Barnacle!
You've slow-rolled the GOP one time too many, boy. The "RINOs" are the base, because they actually bother to vote. You're just a high-maintenance special-interest group that probably isn't worth the pricetag of regular servicing. Anything that you get is a freebie--by your own choice.
Gee, with all the talk of purging the ideologically impure, I swear Stalin has come back as a "conservative" and is posting here under multiple names.
Could someone explain to me how "purging the RINOs" increases the odds of winning elections?
The top bracket of rich people you hate (e.g. the top 10 percent of taxpayers) pay the vast majority of income taxes in the U.S.
Yeah, I'd like to see some kind of validation of those charges too, preferably by a conservative source. There are FReepers buying wholesale the notion that a small but effective percentage of "white Evangelical Christians" voted for Gore because they thought Bush too liberal. On its face, the very idea is loony toons Michael Rivero incredible. The incriminating data is from a liberal source that went out of its way with leading questions to marginalize the white Christian conservative voting block. And now, rather than offer an olive branch, as is being done for every fringe liberal voting block - the Bush republicans are using this questionable poll data to further marginalize white Christian conservatives and drive a permanant wedge into the party.
There's something rotten in Denmark Washington.
Regarding this story the Republicans have been telling for some time about rich people paying the large majority of taxes. Look that story the republican cheerleaders tell only applies to income taxes. Of all the revenue the fed guv takes in I think it is only 25-35% from income taxes. Of that proportion of federal revenue the rich people pay the lion's share. That's true. But another similar chunk of federal revenue comes from payroll taxes. That comes entirely from working slobs.
In our country the way taxes work a person working as a consultant at $100 per hour will pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than a working stiff making $15 per hour. The working stiff will have payroll taxes taken out by the computer. The consultant will hire a tax person and the tax person will be able to get that tax bill down to the point that as a percentage of income the lower income person will pay more.
In the book of Matthew it is explained what our proper attitude should be towards the unemployed. It says that in the world god wants us to build we go into the marketplace and we seek out those who want jobs and we give them jobs, all of them, not just some of them, but all of them. We used to follow that ideal in America. Outside of the 1930's the American unemployment statistics prior to 1970 and for 100 years of good statistics was normally between 3.0 and 3.5%. When it went up much more than that the Wall street Journal and others would howl that the government has to get the economy going to get unemployment down.
The republicans in this country used to be christian and more than just in a token way. Today we have a new idol to worshop regarding this matter. The republicans are first and foremost at promoting this new god. Alan Greenspan was appointed to his position precisely because he is a liberal republican economist. Greenspan believes in high levels of unemployment. He's said so publicly. Greenspan says that when unemployment comes down that it is a sign of inflation. He says that when unemployment begins to get near what is historically normal in america that those pesky workers are going to seek raises and that american business can't compete by paying a decent family wage the way they used to. So greenspan according to his own description of his own policies raised interest rates over and over and over again to stop lower income people from prospering so that big corporations operating in a dream world of high finance could show the bankers that they don't have domestic cost increases due to stupid workers wanting to get paid so they can support families.
This is the new Republican ideology, do whatever it takes to maximize corporate profits. If the unemployment rate goes to double or triple what used to be normal in our country, then it doesn't matter at all to the republicans. We have a big wedge opened up between lower income and upper income. The income gap is growing so wide compared to what it was. We have armies of men on street corners. We have mexicans deciding on their own that they can make more money in mexico and going back to mexico because the market's bad here. We have huge numbers of americans who can't afford families. We have huge numbers of americans who can't afford medical care. All this is OK with republicans, but if corporate profits dip, then republicans will go into action.
Keep in mind how many bad laws and bad regulations have been imposed on the american economy domestically the last 30 years that have had the impact of destroying industry and jobs for no benefit to the environment. The republicans do nothing to lift this burden.
The Republicans are today behaving exactly like what they used to criticize in the Democrats. They're spending money like drunken sailors. Only the sensibilities of the rich can justify this spending binge. It is not in the interest of the poor people who will be dependent on social security in their later years to squander that money.
The Republicans have negotiated trade deals that are simply not in the american interest, that instead are only in the interest of big corporations. Manufacturing in America is languishing badly, the republicans are turning a cold shoulder to these concerns. The republicans behave consistently like their only constituency is rich people and big corporations. I think that is wrong. I think we are one nation and we should look out for our own people first, all of our own people, even the people that are restricted by laws made by the republicans from living in some cities.
So, you are wrong Austin Willard Wright, it is not hatred that drives me, I merely see what is happening in my country and I don't like it. I used to be a very enthusiastic republican, I not only voted Republican always, but I contributed money and I consistently convinced other people to vote republican also. I did it because I love america and the american people. Today I work against the republicans as much as possible and for the same reason.
Moreover, drawing comparative inference based on a 4% difference when at least 5% of the respondents appear to be either irrational, lying, or mistaken has a very, very low confidence level.
I was not surprised to read Tuesday's front-page article
"Conservatives not satisfied with Bush's record." The
analysis is basically on target. Yet based on my own Texan
observations, I can't believe anyone could say that "most
conservatives don't want to see [presidential adviser Karl
Rove] leave the administration."
While President Bush was governor of Texas, most
conservatives I knew wanted to see a diminished role
for Mr. Rove as political consultant to the Bush
administration. It is difficult — no, let me be stronger —
it is impossible for me to think that Mr. Rove is now
the icon of conservatism in the Bush White House.
While governor, Mr. Bush consistently gave great
speeches on conservative values, and I was happy to
introduce him at a Lincoln Day dinner here in Hunt County.
Yet his record really disappointed conservatives, mainly
because his administration repeatedly appointed liberals
to various judicial positions and citizens committees.
Gov. Bush proclaimed a conservative agenda in speech, then
appointed people least willing to make it happen. This
counterproductive strategy is what happened in Texas, and
I am surprised that anyone could think Mr. Bush's chief
adviser, Mr. Rove, is urging his boss to adhere to
conservative principle rather than pragmatic politicking.
MARK RICE
Republican Precinct Chairman
Former Hunt County Republican Chairman
Greenville, Texas
You suffer under the delusion that most registered republican voters are as liberal as the RINOs that control the GOP. They aren't—not by a long shot. And we do know that the RINOs at the RNC have made a concerted effort to purge the party of conservative candidates by consistently backing the most liberal candidates in election after election.
IMO, the way Bush and the GOP have been alienating conservatives in the last 2 years, the GOP might get a rude awakening this November. BTW, I never remember Reagan alienating any part of the republican base...liberal or conservative. Like his dad, GWB seems to have learned nothing from the success of Ronald Reagan.
Your point that unemployment before 1970 was rarely more than four percent is exactly right! This little-known fact provides a wonderful endorsement for a shift to more laissez faire/free market policies. For most of this low unemployment period period, the U.S. had no income taxes or a minimal income tax prior to the 1940s, no mimimum wage laws, and and very mimimal federal regulations on business. For the first 40 years of this period, the U.S. had no central bank and extremely lax anti-trust laws If you are endorsing a return (indeed acceleration of) to those policies, we have no disagreement. Are you?
The rise in unemployment in the last few decades has nothing to do with a undefined glob called "the rich" and everything to do with the rise of the warfare/welfare state. If you want to solve this problem through playing the game of class welfare (which has produced some terrible horrors during the twentieth century), you are barking up the wrong tree.
It looks like I'm dealing with a real political groupie here.
This is my take on you, Tigger, Eore and Piglet - "Forget principle. Say anything. Do anything. Morph into whatever it takes. Just so that our team wins."
There must be a line beyond which you would not “follow the leader”. Isn’t there? Tell me what it is.
For me and for many Conservatives, the GOP has crossed a line on many crucial issues and is wandering further beyond the point which we are willing to follow. We call to them, write to them, email and FAX them. We implore them to return to our core beliefs. But, all too often we helplessly watch them wander ever further to the left. It's the kind of frustration a parent must feel when a teenager goes off the deep-end.
Go ahead with them if you please. I'll stay right here and hold the fort. Hopefully, when the party arrives to camp beside the Democrats and as they merge into indistinguishable entities, there will be a few who will return home.
Good letter. It gives insight as to where Bush's real roots lie. Disconcerting indeed.
I'm heartened to know that there remain many independent minded folks such as you out there.
Thank God for Free Republic!
And when they fall on their swords for you...you don't turn out to vote. And you haven't since 1992. Everything you've gotten--and you've gotten a LOT, whether or not you're willing to admit it--is a gift. And as for calling, writing, and faxing--if you actually DID do that, you are the extreme exception.
I was a conservative GOP activist from 1994 to early 1996. My experience with "the base" was that they didn't want to be bothered with actually doing any heavy lifting between elections, but they wanted every single one of THEIR pet issues taken care of, and then they MIGHT bother to show up on Election Day, if it was personally convenient. In the wake of the 1995 budget deadlock and how the never-to-be-sufficiently-damned "conservative base" were complete no-shows, leaving Newt and company with zero support against a coordinated and effective Democrat attack, I was the lightning rod for the local GOP's frustration with their "base." The favorite quote about the "base" was Thomas Paine's famous quip about "Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots."
Either start showing up to vote, show up in between elections for the hard work, and generally act like adults--or get used to being ignored.
You Posse Comatatis guys just can't find soulmates anymore.
If you get 7 Private messages in about 15 minutes ... is that a good thing? Context: I received 4 in the last 3 weeks.
I'm kinda new here, but somethings up. I'm going to the Canteen ... I need to be held! ;^)
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.