Posted on 01/28/2004 6:18:24 PM PST by Captain Peter Blood
BUSH TO SEEK BIG BUDGET INCREASE FOR NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS... Laura Bush plans to announce the request -- for the largest increase in two decades -- on Thursday... Developing...
As far as I know, Pat is against the socialist welfare spending Bush II is cramming down my throat. He spoke out, nearly alone on the right, against this latest Trotskyite Internationalist war that Bush II connived us into.
And c'mon, you can't impugn PJB with "cosying up to Marxists" when the neo-cons run the GOP and as unrepentant Trotskyites.
I freely admit that PJB ran a disastrous campaign in 2000 that was frankly so bad that one must suspect his sincerity.
I'm a member of the Conservative Party now. To paraphrase Lincoln, we should stand with a man while he's right and part with him when he goes wrong. Clearly, the GOP leadership has gone so far wrong that Lincoln himself would instruct those loyal to his ideas to abandon the GOP and find something else. The first order of business is to stop lending active support to our enemies - represented by the Karl Roves of the world.
Isn't this nicer than ad hominem attacks?
You are using every populist sound bite in the book. I have nothing against populists; I do however have a real problem with them attempting to hide behind the conservative banner. Now down to business. You want Bush defeated. In that area you are in the same camp as the liberals. You are, by definition, a member of the opposition.
Of course he does. He knows he can say anything he wants without any possibility he would have to put his rhetoric into practice. That is the entire lure of 3rd party candidates. They can promise heaven on earth and never have to deliver it. They do make a nice living losing though.
I fully agree that I'm utterly opposed to the treasonous neo-cons and all they stand for. I'm opposed four-square to Bush II's lies about WMD and Iraqi connections to terrorism, and I'm eight-square against his treasonous refusal to enforce our immigration laws and allowing a silent invasion of our sovereign territory even after we were attacked by illegal immigrants. I'm sixteen-square against his waffling on social issues and his lukewarm, purely palliative efforts to appoint strict constructionists to the bench.
As we say in Wisconsin, ya sure ya betcha I'm opposed to Bush II, and frankly I'd prefer to see Bush II's doggie (what's its name) elected to the office than him.
No doubt. I'm in the opposition.
It's always the case in war that the enemy is most dangerous when he's out of uniform and behind your own lines. The Democrats are the uniformed regulars of the Army of Treason, but the neo-cons are their fifth column. The first order of business is to terminate the neo-con subversion, and then we'll be able to fight the regulars without having to watch our own backs.
They're the same, Mr. Texas. DemonRats = Pubbies.
But of the two, the Pubbies are the more dangerous, because we think they're our own.
I thought you had abandoned the "pubbies" so how can they be OUR own? You have a very hard time keeping your arguments on track.
If you knew then what you know now you would have not voted for Reagan
The GOP is more dangerous than the Democrats
The "neocons" are the nations most imminent threat.
I would suggest that your entire outlook is in complete agreement with the most fringe of the left fringe and that you should join them in their efforts to rid the country of all GOP office holders. BTW, put some chewing tobacco on that rash.
And then lost it 2 years later. Give up, you can't win with that one.
Sorry Wrongforever, Bob Dolt and the Stupid Party brain trust lost it.
Ah, the brilliant debating tactic of calling your opponent a leftist when you have been backed into a corner. Yeah, that's convincing.
Too bad vitoryovertheleft was banned for being a troll. You could have used some help defending this ridiculous NEA proposal from such a master-debater.
No, I'm a conservative, member of the Conservative Party. I never regretted voting for Reagan, who kept faithfully the key promise not to raise taxes. He also stared down the Soviet Union, so I'll cut the man some slack. The question was whether I would have supported Reagan increasing taxes to fund the NEA, and the answer is no, I wouldn't have.
The GOP is more dangerous than the Democrats
Yes, they are more dangerous than the Democrats. The GOP has run up more red ink through massive socialist spending increases. They're more dangerous than the Democrats, because their crypsis makes them more effective.
The "neocons" are the nations most imminent threat.
Yes, clearly the greatest threat to our freedom are those who engineered this latest war and the concommitant attack on the Constitution in the form of the Homeland Security Act. The people who are now in office and who refuse to stop the ongoing invasion from Mexico in defiance of our laws and after we were attacked by illegal aliens are the problem of the moment.
I would suggest that your entire outlook is in complete agreement with the most fringe of the left fringe and that you should join them in their efforts to rid the country of all GOP office holders.
No, quite to the contrary. My opinions are fully in accord with the beliefs of greats like Lincoln. You are the one who supports the party of big government, socialist nanny-state programs, and foreign wars. I'm a conservative, precisely because I'm against all of those things and for traditional marriage and family, strictly limited federal government, states' rights, an end to affirmative action, a non-interventionist foreign policy, an end to the income tax, and so on and so forth. The GOP largely overlaps with the liberals on all of those issues, and the closer one gets to the top of the GOP leadership, the greater the overlap. Clearly, the GOP and its supporters are the "liberals", inasmuch as Bush II supported affirmative action, signed into law massive socialist welfare spending increases, took us to war based on lies and misrepresentations, and waffles on the homosexual agenda (Dick Cheney's little girl, remember her?).
Who's the liberal, Mr. Tex? If you support a party that supports all those things, then by any traditional definition of the word you are the liberal leftist.
The neo-cons are Totskyites, and true to form they pulled off the ultimate Frankfurt School/neo-Marxist trick of re-defining the term "conservative" in the mind of the masses to its exact opposite, via media manipulation. You seem to have bought into this trick of "re-defining" basic concepts out of existence (as they're now trying to "re-define" marriage into oblivion).
If "conservative" means a policy of Trotskyite internationalist wars, massive socialist welfare spending, vast expansion of federal police powers (including the proposed legalization of torture), and open borders that make a mockery of our national sovereignty, then yes the GOP and its supporters are "conservatives."
And yes, if "conservative" means what "Marxist" and "Leftist" used to mean, then those like me who believe in the ideas of the Founders to limit the federal government strictly, to ensure a "republic" instead of a herd "democracy", to protect our sovereignty at all costs, to ensure the limited sovereignty of the several states, and to avoid messy foreign entanglements and foreign wars, and so on and so forth, are "populists."
But since we're haggling over terms, perhaps we could agree to define Republicans as "Conservatives, formerly known as Trotskyites". You know, sorta like "the Artist, formerly known as Prince." And my side could be called "Populists, formerly known as conservatives and stalwarts of the Party of Lincoln."
Agreed?
BTW, put some chewing tobacco on that rash.
As to the snoos juice suggestion, I don't chew. Do you?
But thanks for the helpful suggestion.
Oh, I'll hold my nose and vote for him in November ONLY because the best Demoncrat is unacceptable for national security.
BUT, to me the increasing, as opposed to cutting or eliminating, the National Endowment for the Arts, is craven, stupid, pandering to people who hate everything America stands for. And, I'm a musician! I'm concerned about the loss of orchestras and live music, but I'm sure as hell not in favor of dipping the government's hands into the pockets of people who don't want to pay for culture in order to feel good.
Maybe because he is not aiming for the Left. He knows they won't ever bend.He also knows none of the true.principled conservatives ever voted for him ,either.He is aiming at the big soft middle , which does show up on election day.Those would be my thoughts on this. By the way, this NEA thing doesn't bother me nearly as much as a potential Surrender Party President giving up smashing the jihadis to have "peace" in our time.ensuring we won';but then,we all know the NEA is much more important than National Security and winning the War against murdering Jacobian scumbags.
Speaking strictly for myself, the reason this is the straw that made the camel call the chiropractor is that I can make a logical case in my own mind for most government funding, but simply can't see the need or reason for a publicly-funded NEA. Almost to a piece, great works of art of the past were funded by non-democratic governments, private individuals or groups, or the church (a quasi-voluntary association). Some were even produced because the artist hadto produce it and (gasp) paid for the materials himself.
If my bank account at home is running short of zeroes, I certainly don't rush out to the local starving artists fair and buy up a bunch of paintings to put on my living room walls. We are at war, and I firmly believe that we have better and more pressing needs for our treasure than Piss Christ or the "Sensation" exhibit (the elephant dung monstrosity).
We need a new Lorenzo Medici, without access to the public treasury.
The result: more people will vote Republican.
The cost: those victorious Republicans will rule a socialist America.
This November, I'm voting Libertarian!
Now, there's a brilliant statement.
All laws are voluntary, including the laws against murder, but it doesn't prevent people from murdering people.
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.