Perfect!
Though in my case, some might be inclined to elaborate.
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.
You are the one posing. As an American, when what you really are is a Republican. And damn, that is soooo sad.
Screw your strategy, it sucks anyway. The best strategy would be to be a hero and a man, not a power lover. He would be re-elected in a landslide, even by Dems, but you armchair strategists don't get it.
Or, He could have just done it because it was the right thing to do, not to mention honorable. He sucks, and so do people who apologise for him.
The experiment failed, the patient died.
Hey, ThomasJefferson, were you aware that the real Thomas Jefferson owned slaves?
"Arrogant blowhard."
This is one area where I will fault the President....and also every member of Congress, both the Senate and the House, who voted for it. We have finally reached the point in American history where they don't care, and apparently many of the people who should know better don't care what happens to the Constitution.
And it isn't just this issue....recall back when New Gingrich testified before the House Ways and Means Committee about WTO.....he said we would be giving up a large chunk of sovereignty....apparently it was worth it to him and the GOP members he convinced to vote for it to give the Perverted President his desire!!!
Newt took an oath also.....but you see, they are as bad as the Perverted President because he, too, violated an oath [actually more than one, but thats immaterial]....those who are supposed to represent the conservative element of society have done just as badly as that liberal scumbag......and so many close their eyes.
America doesn't have a chance when both sides act like each other.
I truly believe the majority of people across this nation are sick and tired of this line.
What a patriot.
On the one hand, I guess it could be argued (as some have done rather eloquently) that this was all the President's "plan". I suppose that does put him in a more favorable light then being just a doofus, and signing the bill for another stupid reason. But the fact is that it is an unconstitutional bill. Do we want our politicians signing in (or supporting) laws/bills that are unconstitutional in the first place?
When I first came to FreeRepublic, I was under the impression that those here are critical of any breech of the Constitution, by any elected official. I feel I must support the crowd that is critical of Bush, right now, because this is a clear violation of the First Amendment. (CFR) I still can't believe he signed it. It's almost as great a shock to me as the bombing of the Murrah building, or 9/11. This is an attack on our livelihood, just like those incidents. Maybe no blood was shed, or buildings destroyed, but it's just the same, I believe, if you really think about it.
Sure Bush has done some good things as well! I myself was perfectly happy with his performance. But this is serious, and some naysayers may say, "You're just making this a 'one issue' type of thing. You have to take it all in perspective; not every president is going to agree with you 100%".
I agree with that, but I think a president should agree with the Constitution 100% of the time. Sorry if that's too hard line for some.
Will I vote for him in 2004? I don't know. I really really don't know.
No. He just helped write it. The section concerning the freedom of speech issue is McCain's, and it was in McCain-Feingold. McCain plans on running for president on this bill, of which he was still a "silent partner" sponsor, in 2004.
Perfect!
Though in my case, some might be inclined to elaborate.
Best for the constitution? Surely you jest. In the end this might, MIGHT, work to the GOP's advantage. But it most assuredly does not help the constitution.
My reply was sarcasm. Never mind.
The AD ban doesn't help the constitution but the of the various methods of getting rid of it some are more effective and long lasting that others. The veto is the least effective.
You might also try to work the hardest in the primaries, to unseat these swine and get good candidates for a change. If you can't find someone who represents your vison, then I suggest you stay home instead of rewarding those who work to undermine your goals. "None of the above" is an acceptable vote when all the rest won't do.
"Nobody's right if everybody's wrong"
Yeah... it was brilliant when Clinton took this route with HillaryCare. Little did we know he was a pioneering conservative genius.
PLEASE: Download and READ the whole bill BEFORE passing judgement or accusing those who don't agree with everything you say of being Bush syncophants. PLEASE!!
I'm aware of that, and that you are an idiot.
There was a guy named Roscoe who was a child molester, where you aware of that?
Then perhaps you should credit John McCain with killing CFR. I think McCain wrote this bill just to get it killed by SCOTUS - that way it's off the table for good. Brilliant!
On campaign reform (since it's such a litmus test for so many), he didn't sign it with fanfare, and expressed that it was a flawed bill. As a strict constructionist/constitutionalist, I could make the case that it's not the executive's place to decide whether a bill is constitutional or not; let the courts decide, which they will, and which Bush knew they would when he signed the bill. In the meantime, its signing has forced McCain to shut up and sit down -- not a bad thing in and of itself.
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.