Disruptor!
Idiot!
And those are the FACTS, thank you very much!
And lay off the personal attacks, why don't you?
Posted on 03/28/2002 8:04:49 AM PST by sheltonmac
Rather than crash the pro-Bush orgy threads, I thought I would honor the requests of the "we must support the president at all costs" crowd and let them bask in their Republican utopia in ignorant bliss. Consider this a thread that seeks actual debate and discussion concerning the "accomplishments" of our current president. Feel free to voice your support or opposition to the president's policies. After all, dissension, even among conservatives, can be healthy.
This thread is in response to the blatant display of sheer ignorance on the part of some FReepers. There have been several threads initiated lately that have included some rather disturbing posts. Without naming names, I would like to share some of those with you:
"I guess when you want to get MEANINGFUL CFR you avoid the obvious veto bait and keep the issue out of the dem's hands, so that hopefully you can get a Senate elected and some JUDGES appointed.This person supports the president so much that he or she is willing to overlook the clear unconstitutionality of the Incumbent Protection Act. The president ignored his oath of office and deliberately signed an unconstitutional piece of legislation as part of some well-concealed strategy? Please.I guess when you are running a WAR you don't have time for this stuff that is nothing more than petty political junk. Instead, you get the bill where the SC can decide it."
"If you're 'proud he's your President' why don't you try supporting him instead of bashing him.Translation: President Bush is smarter than his critics. We should trust him without so much as a whimper of criticism regarding any unconstitutional legislation he may force down our throats. He hasn't betrayed anyone but the American people, so back off.He's smarter than you are. He knows what he's doing.
And he hasn't betrayed anyone."
"There are many of us who have chosen to STILL support the President even though we may disagree with some of the things he's done. Where is the reality in expecting the President to agree with you on absolutely everything he does? It's nowhere. Because that reality does not exist no matter how hard we try to convince ourselves that it does.Perhaps the "one issue" that dismays so many people is the fact that the president we are expected to support has violated the very solemn oath he swore to keep, that being his promise to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Say what you want about Clinton. Play the "What if Gore were elected" game if you want. That was then, this is now. We have a president in office who essentially told America, "This law may be unconstitutional but I'm signing it anyway."But consider this. Think back two years ago... and now think of what the alternative could have been. Cripe, even Rosie O'Donnell admits she didn't like GWB, but even she supports him now. I am simply amazed that it takes one issue, one issue, to dismay so many people."
Has anyone read the statement on FreeRepublic's main page? It reads as follows:
Free Republic is an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America.I always thought standing for smaller government meant just that, whether that means criticizing a Democrat or Republican administration. We need to ask ourselves one question: are we for smaller government and more freedom? If the answer is "Yes," then act accordingly. Let's not fall into the trap that says we must support the liberal policies of a president at all costs simply because he's not as liberal as a Democrat.
By the way... congratulations. That's actually the stupidest statement I've ever replied to here on FR, bar none. And I'm not normally given to insults or gratuitious criticism.
You must be even more out of your mind than I first suspected.
Shredding the Constitution ?????? You do, of course realise how absurd that is on it's face....
Either agree with me or shut up.
;^)
Poor moaners and groaners.
You don't think Bush retains some responsability here? He did, after all, sign it into law. We know that it didn't have enough support to override a veto either. So, as the last line of elected Constitutional defense, Bush let us down.
EBUCK
A student of the Constitution and government might have noticed that first-past-the-post elections have resulted in a two party system. In a country this size the chances that you will have a President who agrees with you 100% on all issues is about as high as the New York Times endorsing George Bush for President. Grow up, you aren't going to win them all.
Bush called this issue on political rather than ideological grounds to take away an issue the Dems wanted to use to take over the House this fall. Shocking. I would advise you not to go near a legislative hall or sausage packing plant. Both processes are too messy for your delicate sensibilities.
Goldwater stood on his ideology in 1964 no matter how unpopular, even opposing the Civil Rights Act on Constitutional grounds. Reagan in contrast knew when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em. Both were great conservatives. Who accomplished more for the conservative cause?
Bash Bush when you think he's wrong. This is America after all. But if you drop Bush at election time in favor of some no-chance but ideologically pure third party candidate, you may just get to enjoy a President Hillary administration.
This, dear sir, should be the attitude of every conservative who voted for Bush. It is possible to support the president while at the same time criticizing those policies with which you disagree. Conservatism is not embodied in one man or one administration. It is a constant struggle.
The lesser of two evils is still evil. You are confortable voting for evil it seems.
So who would you vote for in a two man race, Hitler or Stalin?
.I can't say this is enough alone to make me stop voting for him.
Hard to imagine what it would take.
Sadly, his views on the constitution are probably conservative compared to the opposition...(I still think he is a good man and C 'n C.)
My neighbor is a good man too, but I wouldn't want him to be President.
The second actually. It is not nearly as stupid as the guy who took 10 minutes after replying to it the first time to come up with a doltish statement like that.
FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: That operation is outside of BushBot program parameters.
Ahem..."Smaller government"?? THAT is one of the supposed tenets of Conservatism, and that of Free Republic.
Sorry to all Bush-O-philes -- on this basis domestically, Dubya has been the complete antithesis.
Disruptor!
Idiot!
And those are the FACTS, thank you very much!
And lay off the personal attacks, why don't you?
Yes, it is, and I'll tell you why: it is a place where grassroots conservatives - and others - can hash out differences in a forum of open and (mostly) civil debate. So what if we don't always agree? Maybe YOU don't mind the thought of 80+ thousand blind party automatons posting to the same forum (as long as they all hold the same point of view as you)...but I find the idea FRIGHTENING. And extremely boring.
Racist, StormFront Mexican hater!
Since last week when I was alone in saying that the best route for both the constitution and the GOP is for Bush to sign and let GOP rep's kill it in the courts. Each day more and more FReepers come to see the wisdom in it. I attribute much of the success of this migration of opinion to the absolute hysterics of the anit-Bushies. "He committed treason, the constitution is no more, he lied to us. "
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.