HOW CONSERVATIVE IS PRESIDENT BUSH?

The Cato Institute ^ | August 3, 2002 | By Veronique de Rugy

[HalfIrish]

Every president from FDR onwards has ignored the fact that we're a constitutional republic. W isn't alone there. You think working within the system when the system has broken down is possible. I don't.

[nopardons]

That's right, dear, President Bush has " covered up " for the Clintons. Yep, okay, right, you know EVERYTHING ... NOT !

Unlike you </B., nether my head, nor anyother part of me is buried in anything. I stated historical facts, and you ooooooooooooooooooooooze emotion.

[HalfIrish]

You're telling me with a straight face that all of Ashcroft's deep sixing of investigations into Chinagate, etc are not proactive?

And please respond in bold again while accusing me of being the emotional one.

[nopardons]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ... you can remember that I am a webbie, when it suits you ; but, you feigned ignorance that I am a woman, and played your " I'm a Southerner , innocence game ", recently, when I called you out, for calling me " buddy ".

I suggest that you stop attributing specious things to people, whom you are personally attacking, sub rosa, and whom you really don't know anything about. These gambits just aren't working and you continually look the fool.

[Twodees]

I entered the damn date of birth which Reg could have found here had he looked hard enough or saved it for future reference

Wow. So y'all give out your full DOB on the swoonfest threads and not just the month and day. Why do you do that? Isn't that asking for trouble?

One of the most common signs of an ex-alcoholic is that they can never admit they are wrong.

There's no such thing as an "ex-alcoholic". Believe me because I'm in a position to tell you. Alcoholics who don't drink are still alcoholics. Maybe your husband and father in law can't admit it when they're wrong. I'll admit I'm wrong when I know I'm wrong. I hope you'll do the same but it isn't going to worry me.

[Satadru]

The House is much more important than the Senate. Nearly all bills originate in the House. The Senate is good for nominations and treaties. Reagan did all he could to destroy the evil empire, and he succeeded. Reagan actually slowed down the spending binge of the 70s. On the other hand, Bush only accelerated Clinton's spending spree. If Bush was serious about his Axis of Evil speech, then he would put China into that category. But, Bush does not have the balls to do that. He is in fact helping out the Axis of Evil. He must go!

[nopardons]

Please go do some research about ALL of the presidents. Some did NOTHING much, some were drunks, some were corrupt (long before the Clintons showed up in D.C. ), one was a closet homosexual, and NONE , not even George Washington, himself, did what you claim you want / they did ... behaved as though we live in a " Constitutional Republic ". FYI ... we live in a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC ; but thanks fgor playing. :-)

[Satadru]

Sometimes the truth requires very few words.

That is why you should maintain absolute silence.

[HalfIrish]

I see where you may have inferred that I thought all the prez's before FDR were good team players. That wasn't my intention. I just like to concentrate on the prez's that have done the most in my time to ruin the Founders' dream. Surely you can dodge the assertion some other way? I know you remember it -- that W's administration is proactive on sweeping Clinton's mess under the rug.

[Satadru]

Are you claiming that Bush is more pro-life than Reagan. Is that a joke? There would have been no pro-life movement without Reagan. Reagan first instituted the Mexico City policy. Reagan did not start government subsidy to carry out fetal stem-cell research. Bush did. Reagan was the first to talk about a Constitutional amendment to ban abortion. Bush probably does not even know what it means.

[nopardons]

I give up, you win, Jefferson was investigated after he left office, as were Burr, both Adamses, Jackson, Grant, Harding, Wilson,Carter etc. ; jailed too, and some hung . I bow to your expertise. WOW ... I am sooooooooooo impressed by your historical facts and sources. NOT !

You are abjectly lacking in substansive , expert historical facts. You are unable and / or unwilling to comprehend even the simplist facts concerning political reality and historical precident, or lack thereof. You haven't ince given a reliable source, which corroborates your emotional suppositions. Ergo, write whatever silly things you care too. As for me, this is the end of this rather pathetic " debate ".

[Twodees]

Aw please, lady. I was just reminded of your webTV affliction lately. Really I give you very little thought. What you say is never interesting and your have an irritatingly snotty manner of addressing everyone. If you say I called you buddy, I won't argue, but I really don't recall exchanging wiords with you lately.

[Satadru]

Why did Reagan tell Republicans that the Brady Bill was a good law and that they should support it?

The Brady Bill!!!! That was way after Reagan's days. In fact, I would be surprised if he still was in sound health at that time. Do you have any proof of this? Never mind, I am sure you don't. But Reagan's days are over. As much as you try to deflect this, this debate is not about Reagan. It is about how pathetically liberal Bush is. You can badmouth Reagan all you want, but this kind of Democratic tactic would not elevate your man.

[nopardons]

You suffer from selective memory. That won't wash either.

BTW, you NEVER have anything of value to say and you are a weasle, a liar, a poltoon, and don't write English well .

[Satadru]

Social conservatives should approve of the president's pro-life positions

Is that a joke? Guess what, those babies who are killed on taxpayer's expense so that Bush can get Michael J. Fox's vote are not laughing.

[Uncle Bill]

"What is the answer to the problems?"

Political correctness is just another tool, although a very effective one, that is a natural continuum, from the party line. We are seeing it before our very eyes. It is a heritage of communism, but as would be expected, Americans don't see this.

Since the American people are the problem, as they are participating in and running faster towards socialism and Marxist tenets, it will not be "fixed." There is a grasping hope for some that the big government socialists will be run out of the Republican party power structures and start electing real small government politicians to begin the decades long process of restoring the Republic. That makes no sense, as Americans are growing in number that believe it's fine to have the government steal their neighbors hard earned money for their domestic personal bliss and give it to them in a variety of forms. It's so bad they believe it's their God-given right.

Not to mention we are witnessing a president facilitating nothing less than a foreign invasion whose goal is to takeover and annex portions of the U.S. to further the balkanization of America, and institute the full-blown nanny welfare state. Heck, they actually think it belongs to them.

Bush has given full license to law-breaking, and finished off any resemblence of the rule of law, foundational Constitutional pillars by turning his back on the Clinton crimes and throwing all accountability in the sea of never-to-return.

The following mission statement, when compared to Bush's socialist run for big government nannyhood, seems so far away that it sadly almost becomes laughable.

There are many silent Americans that have thrown up their hands and turned there backs on any hope of restoring the Republic, and, when confronted with the weak, corrupt, and pitiful candidates they are presented with, it's hard to blame them. However, one day they will be sorry they didn't storm the gates so to speak and throw the bums out.

Again, I could outline many solutions, but it would be a waste of time, knowing the dreadful state of Americans love of socialism, ignorance and their determination to run over the cliff to slavery, totalitarianism and almost a gleeful push to kill a once great Republic. We are witnessing the fall of it. There can be no world government with a strong vibrant Republic. Don't take my word for it, take theirs.

ABOUT FREE REPUBLIC
What is our mission? Free Republic is dedicated to reversing the trend of unconstitutional government expansion and is advocating a complete restoration of our constitutional republic. Listed below are some of the issues we feel strongly about.

Basically, we believe that the Founders designed our system of government in the form of a constitutionally limited republic, with maximum freedom intended for the people and minimum government control or interference into our personal lives and business affairs.

The united states of America was intended to be a federation of sovereign states, each with its own constitution and state government. Governments at all levels -- federal, state and local -- were to be controlled by the people. Our Constitution explicitly restricts the power of our federal government; and our Bill of Rights guarantees that NO government may infringe upon our God given unalienable rights. This is to ensure that the real power remains close to home, with the states, the local governments and always in the hands of the people.

We the People have granted our federal government limited powers to oversee certain things, such as national defense, interstate commerce, the postal service, the coining of money, and the operation of a court system. Most other powers now in the hands of the federal government were illegally usurped from the states and from the people.

Somehow, over the years, our guiding principles of law, as set forth in the Constitution, have been eroded to the point that the federal government now has total control -- leaving the states impotent and the people as captive servants to the federal government. This must be reversed if we are to survive as a free Republic and a free people.

We at Free Republic are determined to return the Constitution to its rightful place as the Supreme Law of the land as the Founders intended.

It is not necessary for everyone to hold the same views to be members of Free Republic, however, many of us do share many of the following as common beliefs and goals:

• The preservation and complete restoration of our Constitution and Bill of Rights with special emphasis on the first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, ninth and tenth amendments and, of course, our right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness -- free of government intervention.

• We call for the repeal of the 17th amendment, which will reverse the independence of the Senate and reestablish the Senate as a representative of the State governments, as intended by the Founding Fathers. This arrangement was intended to be a critical check against illegal federal expansion over the States, and the people residing in the various States, and will act to return the powers not granted to the federal government, as enumerated in the Constitution, to the states.

• We call for the repeal of the 16th amendment and to abolish the income tax and the IRS. Revenues to the federal government should come from excise taxes and tariffs.

• We call for the repeal of the Emergency and War Powers Acts, an end to all national emergencies and a ban on the unilateral creation of law by Presidential edict. We are also working for the repeal all laws created by unconstitutional and extraconstitutional devices, such as Executive Order or Presidential Directive.

  Repeal of the war and emergency powers acts and the various states of national emergencies will allow the abolishing of all unconstitutional federal law, agencies and departments. This will return us to a Federalist system of government and return many responsibilities to the States and personal rights to the citizens.

  A return to a strictly Constitutional form of federal government will automatically repeal and abolish all unconstitutional federal involvement in states issues such as: crime, health, education, welfare and the environment. The Tenth Amendment will again be in effect, which will bar all federal attempts at legislating social issues. This will also require that social programs such as Social Security, welfare and Medicare be repealed. So too, will most federal subsidies.

• We further call for the rescinding of all treaties and/or International Agreements which are not in perfect agreement with the federal government’s Constitutionally mandated task of protecting the rights of the people.

• We believe that the United States should disassociate itself from the U.N. and that the U.N. should be forced to leave the United States. Furthermore, we demand that the federal government refrain from meddling in the business and squabbles of foreign nations, unless there is an imminent threat to the people of the United States.

• We also call for the strengthening of our military and defenses; the effective control over illegal immigration and smuggling; the paying down the national debt; and strict control over federal agencies like the CIA and the FBI.

[Satadru]

With Reagan we had a "Shining City on a Hill". With Bush we have a shiny new government office on every street.

Right on, brother! That comment sums up all of GW in a nutshell. I am glad that some people remember the 80s. I am sick to death when people compare Reagan's days to Bush's. Noone understands the enormous welfare state that Reagan inherited and what he had to do to turn the tide. Never forget that Reagan made Tip O'Neil vote for his tax cut. Bush, on the other hand, started a love-thy-Democrat orgy fest in Washington.

[HalfIrish]

Citing political grievances of two hundred years ago bolstered your point how..? You won't admit that Bush's administration squashed investigations into the Clinton's lawbreaking no matter how many links, sources, articles, etc. are posted. You've ignored or tried to explain away the hundreds of thousands of words already posted on the subject in this forum. No point in dredging them up again to try and change your mind. Searching the forum is easy for anyone wishing to read up on it without taking your word--or mine--on it.

[Satadru]

Please name a 20th century president, who was more Conservative than the current President Bush.

How about Coolidge? Hoover was excellent as well.

[sleavelessinseattle]

Actually it was a simple turkey shoot.

Yeah, if you go around whispering vague threats to the turkey for three days before you let someone ELSE do the work and they pretty much tag it though with entirely too much ramp up and sloppy delivery-more of an eventually fatal gutshot...yeah TF you were AT a turkey shoot.

And you're a real badass...< /you know, sarcasm. the only language you speak...and poorly at that. you don't even qualify as a bushbot...you're just a loud mouth hostile blowhard who is too lazy to debate on the issues being discussed so you just insult people till they leave...yeah you went to the turkey shoot, allright but it took 400 entries to identify PART of what Twodees was maintaining was indeed a mistake in his position while your reprehensible threatening and intimidating behavior THROUGHOUT THIS THREAD demonstrated conclusively that this entire forum is circling the drain, if your postings are any indication.

What you are is a disgusting, self important, element of devolution in intellectual discourse back to Social Darwinism. Your behavior is an embarassment to rational political discourse and you are the one that should be banned not twodees and not the suspended Registered. Registered overstepped a rule one time...You've openly threatened and abused posters on every thread I've ever seen you on...I find you repugnant as a human being and unworthy of any consideration of your opinions on politics or anything else...

Your internal dialogue is probably too good at shoring up your pathetically fragile sense of self worth to identify any aspects of your behavior in what you just read. I wouldn't point that out except you're participating in a national forum constructed to try and rescue this country from socialism. I bet you are at least subconsciously aware that your comportment is providing a wonderful argument for LEFTIE SUPPORTERS! I really wish you would solve your personal issues on your own time rather than swaggering around injuring the cause of freedom while you wait for the next setback to your externally defined self esteem.

Now go break your arm off patting yourself on the back. That feeling won't last. You're nothing but a junkyard dog masquerading as a debater. Go ahead and threaten me too. I don't support disclosure of private information. And BTW Twodees acknowledged the same position about 200 posts back!..but the level of hostility you demonstrated toward twodees shouldn't be allowed on professional wrestling...I'm not a lawyer but I'd call it actionable as part of a pattern of behavior. But I'd like to see you go over this thread and demonstrate that free commentary was not being systematically discouraged. I'd actually grant you a total victory and leave Free Republic if you could do that..I'll be back tomorrow to see how you do...Any bets I won't? Bark...this is the biggest yard you'll ever get until you learn some manners...Now go ping your clique like a good pack animal. Win or lose I'll find a way to help keep the Constitution alive...What's your agenda if I may be so forward as to ask?