If not Bush, then who?

12-28-2003 | agitate

[Agitate]

I've noticed several threads where people say they will not vote for Bush if he supports certain causes. Some include:

Memogate:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1045476/posts

Broad Amnesty in immigration:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1046165/posts

(Please don't see this as an attack on those threads or any comments in them, it's not.)

While I agree with the conservative position on both of these threads, I don't understand how a person could not vote for Bush even if he does some things that are inexplicable from a conservative point of view.

My belief is nothing could be worse than a democrat in office in 2004. I know that is the lesser of two evils vote, but it is true.

Even if Bush gave amnesty to immigrants to pander to hispanics, which would be disgusting, is that reason enough to allow a democrat a greater chance to get in office? Wouldn't the dems likely do worse?

[Qwinn]

"but- how do we register our disappointment with the way "

Vote for the most conservative option in Republican primaries. That's absolutely fine. I would -never- knock anyone for doing that (even if the prevailing wisdom were that the more leftist republican would have a better shot in the general election). But in a general election? It's no longer safe. The consequences (as illustrated in '92 and Canada) are far too serious to casually dismiss responsibility for. Primaries are for inter-party squabbling. General elections, it's unite or die.

Qwinn

[gatorbait]

I thought the same thing when I voted Perot in..what 92? Yep....and we had Clinton for 8 freepin years! Politics is a funny thing....never count on your vote not counting on for what you voted for.

Man you have that correctly stated. Davey Dumbass(me) voted for Jimmuh in 76.. Now ,THAT was the most stupid thing I have ever done, ever..The first and last time I voted Dem for anything.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

Point taken.

[Agitate]

Dubya will win, even if I don't vote for him.
That means I believe he will win the election.

If Dubya loses, it's his fault, not mine.
That means, if he should lose, I will not feel guilty.

If Bush looses, I won't feel guilty, I'll feel afraid for our future, because he won't loose to a better conservative, he'd loose to a liberal loon like Dean. That would be a Very Bad Thing.

I agree with Qwinn in Post 154, it will be interpreted as a desire to move the country more left by Republicans. Wouldn't it be better to organize and let the conservatives in office know we want them to be more conservative, than let the Presidency go to someone like Dean, or later Hillary?

[inquest]

Bush is co-opting those specific Leftist issues that most attract the voting public. Democrats have nothing else to stand on. He is practically -eliminating- the party of treason, that wants to hand over sovereignty to the U.N., the World Court, Kyoto, etc. If you think it's hard to swing things back to conservatism -now-, just wait till Canadian and French citizens get a vote on our tax rates and social programs.

That's where we're headed under Bush with the WTO and the FTAA. And (and here's the worst part) conservatives are cheering him for it!

By the way, I believe you said that the right message will be sent if you vote for the Constitution party. Well, the Canadian conservative party split in two over the exact same kind of reasons you cite here. Look how well that's paid off for them, and look at what message it sent. They've had a massive liberal majority for over a decade, despite a solid half of their population being conservative. DON'T TURN THE U.S. INTO CANADA!

Canada's form of government is drastically different from ours. There, as well as in other parliamentary democracies, party is everything. It's the party that controls all the institutions of the country, and when we're talking about socialist countries like theirs, that adds up to quite a bit. In addition, there's really only one branch of government: the House of Commons. I don't think there's much that could be done to help societies like theirs.

But here, government is still somewhat smaller and much better divided. In the unlikely event that the CP or LP would pick up enough votes to turn the election away from Bush, the Democrat would have no mandate whatever, and would be staring straight into a double-barreled Republican Congress who'd be utterly unintimidated by him. And the conservative media would be racking up audiences like never before.

If there was a psychotic axe-wielding maniac running around in your house, I don't think you'd hesitate to call your local police even if you did think there was some corruption going on in the department.

Just for the sake of accuracy in analogies, I'm gathering that the axe-murderer is threatening to kill 5 people in my house, whereas the local cops are promising to kill no more than 4?

[Agitate]

I agree with your position. I do not agree with everything that Bush does or has done, I doubt that anyone would agree 100% with any president, but I disagree with virtually the entire liberal/democrat agenda. I cannot fathom voting for anyone but Bush.

I believe that the liberal agenda will indeed sell out America to the EU and UN, which I certainly oppose. I hope I never live to see the day that the USA becomes a socialistic liberal America.

Can you imagine us being attacked by terrorist again, and getting permission from France(spit) or the UN to take action? Or imagine our troops under the command of the UN and subject to the ICC?

This can never happen.

---

Federation for American Immigration Reform

[inPhase]

fbitakes info and you never hear again aand cannot ask about it.

[Revolting cat!]

[Agitate]

While the right was putting its faith in the words in the constitution, the left was gaining control of the media, education, and the courts.

Another good reason to vote for the most conservative candidate available, to get the courts, especially the supreme court back from Clintoon nominees like Bader-gingsberg.

Good post, if I interpret it right, it looks at the long-term strategy for getting the country back from liberals. This is what proponents of the gay agenda and other libs have been doing for years.

[Qwinn]

I hate to tell you this, but I don't think of free trade as a specifically left-or-right wing cause. There are MASSIVE numbers of Lefties who are utterly repelled by free trade (hell, the Communist Manifesto considers it practically the greatest evil there is). And there's lots on the Right who are solidly conservative but who see the virtues of free trade.

Protectionism vs. free trade is frankly a much older debate than either socialism or conservatism. It dominated early American politics as much as today.

I tend to agree with you and I'm not generally in favor of the WTO either, but I acknowledge that that allies me with just as many on the Left as on the Right. It's not strictly a partisan issue, and I think you're really reaching to claim there's ever been any solid concensus on the issue in either party. (actually, the Left -was- once totally united in their position - they were once utterly against it)

"Canada's form of government is drastically different from ours."

Not in the context we're discussing. You didn't give me one example of a difference that would generate any different result should the Republican party split here like it did there. The net result would be precisely the same - conservatives who agreed in spirit on -most- principles would be split over two candidates in every general election and liberals would sweep them all.

"In the unlikely event that the CP or LP would pick up enough votes to turn the election away from Bush, the Democrat would have no mandate whatever, and would be staring straight into a double-barreled Republican Congress who'd be utterly unintimidated by him."

Oh. So you plan on voting for Republicans locally, just not for President, right? And yeah, having both Bush and a majority in both houses of Congress has done lots for getting our judges appointed. Face it - we need a 60 man majority in the Senate AND a conservative President in the white house to nominate judges that they can approve. We need that DESPERATELY. Do you have -any- problem with -any- of the judges Bush nominated? What happens if your "ineffectual" Democrat President nominates ONLY hard-core liberal judges, and that massive Congressional majority has no -choice- but to approve them?

"I'm gathering that the axe-murderer is threatening to kill 5 people in my house, whereas the local cops are promising to kill no more than 4?"

If you really think that the Democrats are that close to Republicans in their level of downright evil intent and scruples and corruption, I don't know that there's much hope of discussing this with you at all. Bush has made mistakes, but if you think Gore would only have been 25% worse, you're a lost cause. Gore would've been a THOUSAND times worse. I suspect your emotion is getting the better of you, and you're holding Republicans to an unreasonably higher standard due to simple anger at feeling "betrayed" - they're still FAR better than the Dems, but you're so bitter that you're in full-bore moral equivalence mode.

Qwinn

[Revolting cat!]

[Regulator]

I work at the OTHER hospital

Yeah, I know. TMC, where I was born!

Just figured you might be watching what's happening across town at the University. It'll be interesting to see if they can hold to the policy, and if other's - like TMC, St. Mary's and St. Joseph's - follow suit. I suspect Kino will remain open to anyone, and the financial drain on Pima County will increase at that place.

[nopardons]

You couldn't be more incorrect, if you tried to be, for the next 1,000 years!

Vote for the fringe of the fringe of the fringe Constitution Party, or whatever, and you'll be ignored by ALL of the media; including FNC.It sends absolutely NO " message ", other than that the fringe don"t count, can't be counted on by the GOP,and will force the GOP to go farther left, to attract the " middle of the roaders ", who won't go off and vote for a third party.

You say it's " small risks ", to vote fringe ? SMALL ? The sovereignty and safety of this nation, is far from something " small "; which obviously, you have a rather difficult time comprehending.

And just WHO are these " solid Conservatives " and by WHOSE lights ? When even the fringiedst of FREEPERS are unable to agree on that query, you're in far more trouble than you know.

[Regulator]

It's neither my intention to adopt leftist lingo or hide the truth, and I regret if I have appeared to do either

Sorry if I come off as the Conservative equivalent of a PC enforcer....especially with someone who is an ally and was looking for honest debate.

It just worries me that now, even in our camp, I have started to see the distinction breaking down.

[nopardons]

Correct on ALL accounts.And look at what all of that utter stupidity gave us!

[dcwusmc]

AFAIK, the authorities already know it. Another former Marine friend is with BICE (formerly customs and INS) and says the same thing. My understanding is that there are orders from DC that arrests are NOT to be made, especially away from the border area. What does THAT tell you? (BTW, the retired Marine/sheriff's deputy is my friend. My brother was in the navy and the only Marines he knows are me and another Marine brother of ours.)... Right, Neil???

[nopardons]

Some are so blinded by their delusions, that reality escapes them; utterly. It's easier convincing a brick wall, than to attempt to discuss this issue with the UNAPPEASEABLES.

[Agitate]

liberty is preserved first locally by domestic blood shed domestically.. fighting the traitors within...

Speaking of traitors within, we should start with Ramsey Clark and International Answer...Does this qualify as treason?

[e_engineer]

It's WARTIME people and unless you know something different, history shows that spending tends to go up in WarTime!!!!

When I first read this line I thought "I could accept all the extra spending if it was defense related, but sadly most of it is socialist pork."

Then I saw that you used 4 exclamation marks at the end of every sentence in your post, so you must be right.

[RoarkMan]

Well now that Nader is out...I guess I'll stick with Bush.

Bush isn't going to please every conservative all the time. Life is complicated - think!