Tarnished Legacy ( If the president does not veto this bill ) Rush Limbaugh

rushlimbaugh.com ^ | 3/20/2002 | Rush Limbaugh

[IncPen]

I'm sick of Limbaugh harping on this.

If Bush vetoes this, he'll be the guy who killed CFR.

Instead, he'll let the courts put it to bed.

It won't stand. It doesn't deserve the scrutiny from us.

[RamsNo1]

Many of us, on this website, are voicing our concerns not mainly because of the eventual outcome of being overturned in the courts. We are talking about principles here! How could anyone including any congressmen or the president support legislation that is blatantly unconstitutional because of opinion polls and a critical media? To sign a bill into law just to hope it gets overturned really is lunacy and is running politically scared when your poll numbers are 80%. Besides, we all will not forget this decision even if the republicans do regain the senate majority and the president can get his more conservative items through the full congress. Just like September 11, we will never forget!

[fellowpatriot]

What I don't understand is why doesn't President Bush call a press conference and explain to the American people why he CAN'T sign this unconstitutional bill and uphold his oath of office at the same time?

[Jesse]

Remember, we have to have Republicans in office if there is any hope. Even if we have to give a little.

Bartender...I'll have whatever he isn't drinking.

[C7pilot]

If we enact ALL their policies, they won't have ANY issues, but there would be no reason to vote Republican.

A brilliant observation. Surrendering incrementally is still surrender. As I tell the innumerable fund raisers that call, if I had wanted Democrat polices implemented I would have voted for a Democrat in the last election.

[Jesse]

Instead, he'll let the courts put it to bed.

Yeah, let the Supremes step up and do the man's work, while Bush does the girlie stuff like violating his oath to uphold the Constitution.

Spoken like a true Bushie.

[bushfamfan]

How does Bush justify or answer to the critics who say he is breaking a campaign pledge? He's just caving like that when it was a big disagreement w/McCain? And the rest of the GOP?? Even my dad, who is a big Bush fan, and never speaks against him, is having a different view of him. What's Bush's answer for this?? Is he going to say it's a good bill?? I want to see what he says after he signs this bill???? He's really hurting this country and himself by these actions, that seem to be giving in too much to Demonrats, politics over common sense and the Constitution. I'm another angry one and this is a serious disappointment that's going to hurt him.

[Dick Bachert]

At the time of his approach to Red China, Richard Nixon (a REPUBLICAN for those of you from Rio Linda) was approached by an internationalist businessman who was literally salivating over the prospect of access to the BILLIONS of potential Chinese slave laborers and “customers” (although this rocket scientist had apparently not yet concluded that the Chinese people would be hard pressed to buy his stuff without MONEY!!!!).

This businessman was concerned that Nixon had been SAYING that he was cooling to the idea of an opening to Red China to quell the uprising within the then very much more America-First rank and file Republican Party.

As reported years later, Nixon told the businessman
“DON’T LISTEN TO WHAT WE SAY: WATCH WHAT WE DO!"

AS YOU READ THIS, IT APPEARS THAT BUSH, DASCHLE AND OTHERS ARE WELL DOWN THE ROAD TO USING THIS PAGE FROM THE NIXON PLAYBOOK!

IT APPEARS THAT DUBYA -- LIKE NIXON (and numerous others) BEFORE HIM --IS NOW “DOING” US (IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE).

Look, America – the IDEA not the PLACE – can only continue to exist if we heed the advice of the founding fathers (paraphrased here in the current vernacular for residents of Rio Linda), to wit:
“The Founding Fathers have determined that failure to WATCH politicians – ALL POLITICIANS (even those you may worship!) – is dangerous to the security of this nation and to the freedoms we paid such a heavy price to TRY to leave you and your children.”

“Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is FORCE. And, like fire, it is a DANGEROUS SERVANT AND A FEARSOME MASTER.”
That from that notorious tinfoil hat wearing, radical wing-nut, George Washington.

[NJJ]

One by one, Bush is depleting their issues. Pretty soon they will have to run on school lunches again.

I think you are right on target. If Bush vetoed the bill he would just take more flak and create another issue for them to run on and the media would relish it. In fact, he can say the subject is too important to stop it and by having it tested in court, only then will it get a proper airing. It appears that it's been watered down anyway to where it will be an embarassment to the Senate.

Bush's priority has to be on the war. He should be able to count on Congress and the Supreme Court cover domestic issues.

[fellowpatriot]

If Bush vetoed the bill he would just take more flak and create another issue for them to run on and the media would relish it.

I disagree. I think this issue presents President Bush with a great opportunity to 'educate' the sheeple and maybe generate a few converts over to our side.

Reagan was very good at this.

[b4its2late]

Let it sit on the desk to meet its fate. And be on the phone talking to McCainiac when it expires.

[I'm ALL Right!]

Sure we can try to get rid of them all, but if this bill is passed, we cannot talk about the candidates without making criminals of ourselves! (60 days out). The media will control all propaganda re: all candidates.

America=China.

[brat]

I don't think we elected Bush so he could play games. We wanted a decisive Conservative. I'm beginning to think we got a liberal instead. Just too many issues that he's gone left on. Excuses for him just won't hold.

[Brimack34]

The problem is we have a lot of freeper's but we are spread out. For every one of us there are 100's that think this is a good thing or do not care. This is what the White House is counting on. But what they do not understand we are the grass root's. We get them elected. Stop taking us for granted or we will let you down when it counts.

[Theodore R.]

You lost me when you called Mrs. O'Connor a "conservative." Her record defies that classification, does it not? Jerry Falwell was the first to warn that O'Connor was no conservative, and the Reaganites laughed at him for daring to tell the truth.

[Theodore R.]

To ThePitts, I believe that Governor Perry is following a ruinous course of action that could cause his upset defeat in November. He is trying to court Hispancis in TX and, the best I can tell, completely ignoring his base. Anyone who thinks Hispanics will vote for Perry this fall must be as confused as G.W. Bush seems to be in Washington these days.

[Theodore R.]

Hi, Bushfamfan, Bush might call CFR a "good bill" because he called his friend EMK "a good man." If bILLclinton didn't know the meaning of the word "is," maybe G.W. doesn't know the meaning of the word "good." And G.W. even said he "liked the man," referring to the MA "senator" who drowned a woman on the weekend of man's walk on the moon in July 1969.

[The Bolt]

He should veto the bill for no other reason that John "Manchurian" Mc"coke"Cain supports it!

[Matchett-PI]

"In the latest Limbaugh Letter, there is a terrific interview with Charles Krauthammer (sp) who says this same thing. Krauthammer explained it quite well, and convinced me."

I have it, and read it also. The discussion about Iraq was highly informative and insightful. I agree it is a terrific interview. Here is his bottom line regarding CFR, for those who haven't read it:

Rush: "You think President Bush is going to sign it, then?"

Krauthammer: "I think he'll sign it. Given the political realities, given the fact that there's a war going on that's really important, I'm not sure I would advise him to sacrifice political capital on this. At any other time, maybe yes; at this time, I'm not sure. He's got a lot on his plate, he's got a war he's going to prepare us for with Iraq. He may calculate, look, the Court's going to save us on this, I'm not going to spend my political capital on it. Because you know he's going to get hammered."

There was a lot more that they discussed in this interview on the subject, but one other point that Krauthammer made was that he said, "I think Mitch McConnell will be filing (with the court) the day after it passes. He'll probably ask for an expeditious review. ... ".

[potlatch]

Re; What I don't understand is why doesn't President Bush call a press conference and explain to the American people why he CAN'T sign this unconstitutional bill and uphold his oath of office at the same time?

You just said the most intelligent thing I've read!