Replies

Rather than give up and stay at home, a better strategy may be for conservatives to realize that the election of President Bush in 2000, and securing a slim majority in Congress in 2002, is just the first step in a long journey. Conservatives should realize that it takes 60 senators to prevail over the Democrats' filibuster.

Conservatives would accept this - IF there was any indication either the senators or the President were actually fighting.

Instead, I see a President who actively fights for increased federal spending on education bureaucracy. A President who actively fights to increase spending on the 'Arts'. A President who actively fights to increase spending on seniors with no regard to their ability to pay. A President who, domestically, has accelerated every spending goal of Bill Clinton! A President who not only doesn't veto, but who twists arms to get the additional spending!

My wife & I gave $1500 to Bush's campaign in 2000. We've been betrayed. At least the Republican Congress acts REPUBLICAN if they have a democrat President. But with GWB, they have a republican President who campaigns against the Republicans in Congress!

I want GWB to win for the foreign agenda & judges. I want him to lose because a democrat president & republican congress will result in more conservative government. I may sit this one out. And I'm not giving a penny to GWB.

Regarding the judges: imagine how nauseated you will be if "President Kerry's" Supreme Court nominees sail through, probably 94-6, with the active support of Chairman Hatch. That's what Hatch did in 1993 and 1994 as the ranking member on Judiciary for B. Clinton's nominations of the leftists Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. Of course, we cannot be sure that Bush would name a conservative to the Supreme Court if an opening does develop. But we can be absolutely certain that Kerry would name a clone of Ginsburg, Breyer, Stevens, or Souter, all socialist peas in a liberal pod.