Replies

In several of your posts, you've taken it upon yourself to challenge the intelligence of people who disagree with you and to suggest they are not really "conservatives." Further you have suggested that they do not belong on this forum if they hold these views as they are naive. Finally, you have suggested that it is only Bush bashers who are suggesting that he is violating his promises during his campaign who are simply looking for a new stick to beat him with.

I would first direct you to the front page of the Free Republic forum where it reads:

"Not over my dead body will they curtail your free speech!"

-- President George "Dubya" Bush (what he should say re: CFR)

Suggesting that it is not a conservative position to be troubled by our president's action in this case is not supportable. And regarding your suggestion that only Bush-bashers are opposed to the president's actions in this case is also off the mark. I have supported the president in virtually all of his decisions thus far. I volunteered for his campaign. You are flat out wrong to suggest that my motivation is simply to bash him.

Regarding the intelligence of those how oppose the president's action: To challenge your assertions here would be wasted effort as you don't seem to be engaging those who are in opposition to your views, but are instead picking up the Lib practice of labeling your opponents in unsavory ways. To which I respond by sending a giant raspberry in your general direction.

Your arguments suggesting that anyone who opposes the president's actions are not supporting him in the general election are also without merit. Because he is making a dumb move now does not mean that I won't vote for him in 2004 given the prospects of his potential opponents.

Finally, your suggestions that anyone who is opposed to the president's actions in this issue are ignorant of the political process are also baseless. We are not simply talking about the ultimate action this law will have on campaign finance. It MAY be shot down by SCOTUS, but there are likely very bad portions of this law that will remain intact. At least as big of an issue as the ultimate tactical implications of the law is the fact that Bush is going back on a pledge he made to conservatives in signing this bill. This not only undermines his support among his strongest supporters, it will be used as a big stick to challenge his campaign pledges that he is a man of principle. By doubling back on one of his pledges, he has forfeited the right to claim that pledge of the moral high ground and it will be very hard for him to make that case again.