Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Conservatives simmer as spending mushrooms under Bush
AP ^

Posted on 01/05/2004 1:19:09 PM PST by G. Chapman

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 321-334 next last
To: All
This growth in government spending reflects what happened at the state level when "W" was governor. See this economic report, circa 1999. When I tried to make this a point back in 2000 on FR, it didn't seem to meet with any interest...
141 posted on 01/05/2004 7:01:34 PM PST by ricer1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
maybe we can find out after we take care of terrorism...

The Republicrats tried to scare you with the Dems until you found out they were just like the Dems. Now they will pump the terrorism thing to keep you going to the polls for them. Don't think that they are the only ones who can deal with this situation, that is what they are banking on to keep rolling out their socialist agenda.

142 posted on 01/05/2004 7:05:48 PM PST by Nanodik (Libertarian, Ex-Canadian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: G. Chapman
I see it posted at Drudge!

We must push W back to the center and then to the right!

143 posted on 01/05/2004 7:06:58 PM PST by Kay Soze (Fiscally - whats the difference between Hillary and W? Why do you dislike pushing W to the Right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wirestripper
you don't think that would be a great rally point for conservatives? having the polar opposite of what we stand for beat the poor excuse for a conservative currently sitting in the white house would do wonders for the half-wits who seem to be propping up Bush. It would be a hard pill to swallow if Dean won, but it might just be the shock that a rather complacentand lackluster GOP needs in order to get its crap together.

Its really sad that we have to call into question Bush's fiscal record. He threw out tax cuts it appears as an apeasment option and then went to work spending like Ted Kennedy. Congress I might add is just as much to blame. Bill Frist is possibly the worst Senate majority leader in history. The guy could'nt buy a headline, let alone articulate a leadership stance, take a look at the judicial nominations debacle for "leadership" as far as the current crop of old men sitting on the hill.

We need new blood, we need conservative blood, we dont need someone who makes his legacy as one of total fiscal irresponcibility. As much a disarray as the Dems are today, the GOP isn't far behind when it comes to standing by its principles and pushing its agenda. Everyone on the hill seems just happy as a clam to piss away my money, and I'm tired of it.
144 posted on 01/05/2004 7:27:45 PM PST by G. Chapman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
So you guys are going to vote for a DEMOCRAT president? At this point I think we already have a DEMOCRAT in office.
145 posted on 01/05/2004 7:29:48 PM PST by G. Chapman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
Perhaps aftert having afternoon tea with the NOW nags who mortgaged their integrity to keep a cheating husband/ rapist in the White House?

They did pay a price for that didn't they? The arguments of their spokespeople were so outlandish and went against everything they had ever stood for that even normally friendly reporters and interviewers expressed disgust with them. Even Katie Couric, as I recall- shook her head in disbelief and commented on what a joke NOW had become after a story on their stand on Clintons' impeachment.

I rarely see anyone from NOW interviewed anymore much less even quoted on "women's issues."

146 posted on 01/05/2004 7:39:15 PM PST by Burkeman1 ("If you see ten troubles comin down the road, nine will run into the ditch before they reach you")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: G. Chapman
I was going to point out the fact that we're at war, but I couldn't remember what Grannie's free drugs has to do with the war effort.
147 posted on 01/05/2004 7:43:35 PM PST by Redcloak (°¿°)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G. Chapman
I understand where you are coming from, (farm bill got my goat as well) but the fact remains that Clinton did much damage in eight years to the moral and Constitutional structure of the country. (not to mention the Office of the Presidency)

Bush took office without a mandate. This is a bad situation to start from. (I'll not elucidate)

In order to assure two terms, he had to do some things.

What he did, a brilliantly done, was to take away the three main issues of the democrats and usurp their agenda. He made it his and put his changes into it and got it all passed. Every bit of it.

He did it because it would have been done anyway, had the rats got the office back and he wanted to put a Republican face on it. he also did it with much less money than was anticipated and he will get that second term, assuming the sky does not fall in.

The Republican congress is preparing to get the cutting tools out and find room in the budget for these things. The democrats will now have to go along with it because of those damn tax cuts and it is really ticking them off. They see it coming!

lastly, even with all this stuff, we are still below the Reagan years as a percentage of GDP.

I look forward to some veto's in the coming four years. I also look forward to a better and brighter future because of what has been accomplished.

Stay with the team. The offense is going to be great next year and the possibility of a win in 2008 is not out of the question for sure!

148 posted on 01/05/2004 7:47:04 PM PST by Cold Heat ("It is easier for an ass to succeed in that trade than any other." [Samuel Clemens, on lawyers])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: wirestripper
Stay with the team. The offense is going to be great next year and the possibility of a win in 2008 is not out of the question for sure!

Go team! Can't wait to see them play in the second period!

/sarcasm

149 posted on 01/05/2004 7:54:41 PM PST by Nanodik (Libertarian, Ex-Canadian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Nanodik
Don't think that they are the only ones who can deal with this situation,

Show me one other party candidate that supports our actions in Iraq. The second the word "preemptive" comes out of a persons mouth, I lose all respect for their intellect.

150 posted on 01/05/2004 8:03:15 PM PST by Texaggie79 (Did I just say that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: G. Chapman
So.... you are going to vote for a REAL democrat?
151 posted on 01/05/2004 8:06:50 PM PST by Texaggie79 (Did I just say that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: G. Chapman; All
In case you don't know, your dandy thread musing about handing the election to Dean has been linked on one of the Deaniac sites. They're loving it.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/1/6/23641/58238

Happy now?


152 posted on 01/05/2004 8:09:15 PM PST by amordei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I won't vote for a Democrat, and would open a vein before I'd vote 3rd party.

These useless symbolic runs for the Presidency underscore the intellectual vanity and lack of seriousness on the part of nearly all 3rd parties.

I guess doing the hard work of local campaigning and actually building a consituency from the grassroots up is beneath them?

I have been extremely critical of Bush on this site and the sorry state of political discourse in this country but the Constitution Party? Yeah- I agree with them on an intellectual level- but they are not even trying to win a local election in a state or congressional district that is most receptive to their view point. The libertarians are trying but they as well should not be wasting money on useless runs for the Presidency and be working on the local level.

My mother died recently at a rather young age. The local GOP Pol showed up at her wake because I had worked on local and statewide campaigns some 15 years earlier for him and he rememnbered! That is nitty gritty of politics and what third parties should be doing instead of these vain glorious runs for the Presidency! Since I live in Massachsetts - I might just vote for a third party for the Presidency (unless it looks like Bush has a chance in Mass). But to vote third party in a presidential election in a competitive state? I just don't get that. 18 year olds vote for ideological purity but adults do not.

153 posted on 01/05/2004 8:13:37 PM PST by Burkeman1 ("If you see ten troubles comin down the road, nine will run into the ditch before they reach you")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: KDD
"On 26th February 1993, at approximately 12.18 p.m., an improvised explosive device exploded on the second level of the World Trade Center parking basement."

I call that a terrible event, but the airlines did not stop flying, Wall Street did not shut down, the market didn't do a nose dive, tourism was not stopped for days and crippled for months to come.

While the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma was a tragedy, it had nearly no impact on the economy of the nation as a whole, unlike the attacks on 9/11. The cost to New York ALONE exceeded $90 billion dollars, there were 237,000 jobs lost in the travel industry alone in the aftermath.

154 posted on 01/05/2004 8:19:12 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Gift Is To See The Trout.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
Does it matter so much to you the letter beside the person's name? I don't care if they've got a U by their name, if they're calling for spending at the level Bush has there is only one name for them. Liberal.

And no, I won't vote for a Democrat. However, I may very well vote Constitution Party.

155 posted on 01/05/2004 8:19:40 PM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: amordei
Cool. But most of us would not vote for a democrat. They are actually acting civilized over there though. Not like the lame du posts that people put up here. There is even one person talking about sliting a vien. Could it be.......Nah........
156 posted on 01/05/2004 8:27:59 PM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: billbears
And no, I won't vote for a Democrat. However, I may very well vote Constitution Party.

I might as well. But I live in Mass liberal land where 80 percent of the time we vote for the Dem presidential candidate. So my vote is lost anyway. But your state? Is it that secure for Bush?

Instead of these symbolic runs for the Presidency parties like the Constitution Party should be spending their meager funds on local elections - even if dog catcher. These vain glorious runs for the presidency are laughable and not serious.

157 posted on 01/05/2004 8:29:35 PM PST by Burkeman1 ("If you see ten troubles comin down the road, nine will run into the ditch before they reach you")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: theFIRMbss
I won't vote for a democrap and I shure as hell won't vote for Bush!

He's done more damage in 3 years than clinton did in 8!
158 posted on 01/05/2004 8:31:05 PM PST by dalereed (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: G. Chapman
"Re-election has become the focus of Republicans in the White House and Congress. And those in power have determined the road to staying in power is paved with government spending,"

That's right. Bush and Rove have crunched the numbers and decided the way to get re-elected is to beat the Democrats at their own game: spending.

Bush and Rove have made the conscious decision to give me and other fiscal conservatives a straight-up middle finger. They have made it abundantly clear they don't need our votes. So they certainly won't get mine this time round.

That's the way it goes.

159 posted on 01/05/2004 8:38:23 PM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dalereed
I won't vote for a democrap and I shure as hell won't vote for Bush!

He's done more damage in 3 years than clinton did in 8!

Yes- he has. There is no doubt about it. There is really no sense in arguing it. But if Dean is elected we lose any chance of sane justices being appointed to USSC and can kiss this country goodbye for the next 30 years. Not to mention that Dems have a nasty habit of running wars badly and expanding them (but that would make a lot of "phoneycons" here happy wouldn't it?)

Quite frankly and oddly enough- iff Bush fails to win this election the GOP is all done for me and many other conservatives since they won't have the Supreme Court issue to wave around anymore. This is the GOP's last Hoorah so to speak. It is either put up or shut up.

160 posted on 01/05/2004 8:38:37 PM PST by Burkeman1 ("If you see ten troubles comin down the road, nine will run into the ditch before they reach you")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 321-334 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson