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

Skip to comments.

President Bush Outlines Campaign Reform Principles
The Whitehouse ^ | March 15, 2001 (One year ago) | George W. Bush

Posted on 03/22/2002 1:12:55 PM PST by Jim Robinson

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-238 next last
To: Jim Robinson
AMEN!

AMEN AMEN AMEN AMEN AMEN AMEN.....you get the point!

An aside, I was thinking now that we've eliminated those negative ads, now we can campaign to eliminate the negative news? Might be fun to watch them scream.

41 posted on 03/22/2002 2:53:49 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howie66
"Yeah! And just in case he forgets, we'll show him by electing algore or maybe Josef LIEberman in 2004! Then he'll see!"

That which you think a joke is actually the truth. Running from the truth will never allow you to face and address it. Until we vote straight liberal tickets and eradicate completely FAKE conservatism, we will never be able to overcome liberalism. To win this battle, we need REAL conservatism. The ONLY way we're ever going to get REAL conservatism is by getting the fakes out of the way. The republican party is 99% pure FAKE.

42 posted on 03/22/2002 2:55:18 PM PST by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
The main problem is that we have a right-left opposition in government that is shaping up like the *sigh* French elections. Bush tries hard to look good to the lefties by doing social stuff for them, but it does not work because lefties and Dem voters are not so dum to believe that Bush is anything other than a corporate sponsor. Still, if he was an earnest corporate sponsor, it is not so bad as the Dems supporting openly drug addicts in the White House. I'd rather have a King there than a queer.

America should have two parties that pull each other on jurisdictional ground and not on social class ground, though social classes have their own jurisdiction in their own rights. After all money has its own jurisdiction, and so do the bums in the streets who have nothing to lose and possess a force of their own for this very "quality". But money or nothing to lose attitudes are very cynical jurisdictions that in the end work only for themselves and not for the respect of jurisdiction in general as the Founding Fathers had intended.

Still America should refocus on jurisdictional grounds vs the communist prone ground of social class struggle existing in the righ against left system. What is needed is a Federal jurisdiction party vs. Individual/State jurisdiction party created, so that we come back to discuss at the political level sane constitutional matters, and not the gibberish of brands of political correctnesses and zealotry we have today between leftist definitions and rightist definitions. The Libertarian party pretends to take that project but it is a party misleading many toward politicaly correct goals that the left supports, and, in fact, the libertarians never really speak in terms of jurisdiction but in terms of definitions. Individual jurisdiction amongst libertarian is highly limited around what one should feel in his own immediate environment and body, and not beyond, while we know that vital civic duties in the US do require larger jurisdictional powers of individuals, such as the options of addressing issues of nuisances of drug addictions, prostitutions, single mums etc., jurisdictions Libertarians want to deny individuals and states for purely definitional reasons that are taken outside the scope of due processes of law.

We need to redefine America, to refocus America on the main issue: Jurisdiction. We cannot go on like this being imposed this social class struggle that the stupid rich and bourgeois fall easily trap into to their own destruction and the benefit of those who have nothing to lose and who have so many ways to drag the nation down to levels that make "nothing to lose" attitudes the winning party.

Bush is completely disoriented and erratic, he has difficulties separating business from other issues, and he seems very uneasy in his spirituality. Democrats feel they are well orientated by leftist doctrines, but that is an illusion because they orient themselves according to a precise book of definitions that paint a completely distorted picture of reality. The social engineering promoted by democrats is not even at all like a pro-federal government view, it is a view that seeks to define and control masses of people and individuals as one would name animals, plants and rocks. It denies completely man's capacity to make decision, whereas true pro-Federal people acknowledge this capacity but intend to make it work in coordination with the Federal government.

These are very dangerous times for America, and we are playing with fire, and Bush should be frightened by his own disorientation and the way he disorients his party base. The complete lack of situational awareness that this country is suffering from is mystifying in the light that Americans are such able people who can handle things and entrepreneurial manner. Americans are skilled, and that is good that they have confidence in manipulating animals and matter, but that is not enough, the American people need to re-learn how to deal with people, how deal with themselves as a people, which is a totaly different skill area than doing an everyday good job, yet a very crucial one without which America will be thrown into a political situational confusion maelstrom of divisions and confusions of revolutionary proportions and much more dramatic than Adam and Eve's confusion after biting the fruit of "knowledge" and definitions of good and evil man.

43 posted on 03/22/2002 2:57:00 PM PST by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Jim Robinson is 100% correctamundo! Bush is a liar. He has been evasive from day one. I trusted him and tolerated it. That was foolish of me.
44 posted on 03/22/2002 2:57:15 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Sham
That which you think a joke is actually the truth. Running from the truth will never allow you to face and address it. Until we vote straight liberal tickets and eradicate completely FAKE conservatism, we will never be able to overcome liberalism. To win this battle, we need REAL conservatism. The ONLY way we're ever going to get REAL conservatism is by getting the fakes out of the way. The republican party is 99% pure FAKE

Well at least you didn't lie about your screen name.

45 posted on 03/22/2002 2:58:38 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Sheesh, no wonder the right has derservedly earned the nickname, "reactionaries".

It is not that your points are without merit. I know that. But the Right stands for truth. We like character. We didn't have Clinton just because of his liberal views. We hate liars. That seems like a reasonable position to take and we are holding all candidates to that same standard!

46 posted on 03/22/2002 2:59:32 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: n.y.muggs
I like Condoleeza Rice (I'd like to know more of her views though), Alan Keyes (he needs to soften his delivery a bit), and JC Watts. Not even remotely because they are black, but it is interesting that that's who I picked. (I love Thomas Sowell too! But we need him where he is.)
47 posted on 03/22/2002 3:02:02 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill
"Exactly. Bush never said that he would veto CFR"

Yup when he was in office and had to deal with the issue. But you go ahead and flagellate yourself, while you never bring in solutions or strategy.

You are a one note Bill, IMHO.

The tinfoil feels good, it's the liars we don't like.

Wow that tin foil is really getiing to you, IMHO. You are using the "royal" we.

48 posted on 03/22/2002 3:04:06 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson;all
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. It was my understanding that the Congress makes the laws. The President enacts the laws. And the Judicial Branch, the Supreme Court reviews these laws when they are challenged.

President Bush has said that he thinks there are some problems with this bill, constitutionally. But he cannot just sit on this bill. He must either sign or veto. I believe that this bill is veto proof. Since he is damned if he does sign it, or damned if he doesn't sign it, he may as well sign it and get it kicked over to the Supremes. THEY will decide the constitutionality of this bill. ONCE AND FOR ALL. He will have taken away the "issue" of CFR and he will have McCain off his back and the other left wingers and Rinos off his back.

Am I missing something here? I don't see what else he can do. Anyone???
49 posted on 03/22/2002 3:05:11 PM PST by baseballmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
It is not that your points are without merit. I know that. But the Right stands for truth. We like character. We didn't have Clinton just because of his liberal views. We hate liars. That seems like a reasonable position to take and we are holding all candidates to that same standard!

Well then you are going to be in the wilderness a long time. This is politics and you know it, name me a President since and including Washington that has not played politics.

My notion is that I will be waiting a long time.

BTW, you are also using the "royal" we.

50 posted on 03/22/2002 3:07:18 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: baseballmom
you are right, but others will disagree.
51 posted on 03/22/2002 3:07:52 PM PST by mystery-ak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Dane, Dane, we have solutions here, come on.


52 posted on 03/22/2002 3:08:12 PM PST by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill
Dane, Dane, we have solutions here, come on.

Uh I didn't ask for the run of the mill reactionary "solution". But that doesn't matter since you have no strategy.

BTW, what's up with you, an individual, using the "royal" we.

53 posted on 03/22/2002 3:11:55 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: baseballmom
The only problem with this is Bush's intent.

Bush proactively supported and indeed begged Congress to send him a CFR Bill.

RBMiller (Newly registered Independent)

54 posted on 03/22/2002 3:12:31 PM PST by rbmillerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Howie66
All that I can say is; I sure as hell don't want to see our country turned back over to the (can't use the real terminology here) democRATs again

They get the House back and it is over. They learned their lesson in 1994. They will never give up power if they get it again. For 20 years the moderates and the patriots in that party have lost elections or become Republicans. The Stalinist left is in control. CFR is but a taste of what they really want to do. If they become a majority in the House again, we'll look back to the days of Tip O'Neil, Dan Rostenkowski and Tom Foley as the good times.

55 posted on 03/22/2002 3:15:29 PM PST by LarryLied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: chainsaw
bump
56 posted on 03/22/2002 3:18:05 PM PST by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
Yeah, vote Pat Buchanan.

No thanks. I had enough authoritarian Republicanism under Nixon. Besides, I like buying towels and underwear from whoever I want and not from Pat's billionaire buddy Milliken.

57 posted on 03/22/2002 3:20:04 PM PST by LarryLied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: baseballmom
Take a look at this post from GraniteStateConservative..... It outlines your thoughts very well.
58 posted on 03/22/2002 3:20:13 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Howie66
Yeah! And just in case he forgets, we'll show him by electing algore or maybe Josef LIEberman in 2004!

Forget those losers. Stick with the winners. I'm voting for Hillary. .... gag ....burp!

59 posted on 03/22/2002 3:22:05 PM PST by slimer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: n.y.muggs
Let me remind the freeper formerly known as Clarity, that changing your mind over an issue a year later is not a lying.

Absolutely right on. A good man will sometimes judge an issue one way, and then with a closer inspection and more information will judge it differently. Doesn't make him a liar.

60 posted on 03/22/2002 3:30:37 PM PST by My back yard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-238 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