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.
I completely agree with that. I wish he hadn't signed it. There's absolutely no way I would have, if it were my call. But still, I'm not yet prepared to declare the Constitution dead at Bush's hand. The game is indeed dangerous--and needlessly so--but not yet over.
Unless, of course, the Supreme Court SAYS I'm right, in which case I am, because the Supreme Court is God, after all, and the Constitution doesn't mean squat until they say it does, and even then only until they change their minds and say it doesn't.
What a strange world you must live in where words change their meaning every day.
It gives one pause to wonder why it is a game at all.
What happened to honesty?
What happened to saying what you mean, and meaning what you say?
Politics could certainly use a healthy dose of it.
Ok, we get it you don't think the constitution is very important. At least not as important as the re-election of GW. I have to be honest with you though. That is not something I would be very proud of.
Please, read the entire bill.
Are you trying to suggest that it is a principled piece of legislation?
Well, I basically quoted the Constituion; and now you seem to have a problem with THAT, too? You're the one who went on the rant because evidently you don't even like what THAT says.
Do you want the Supreme Court to stop doing what they are suppose to do, or do you just want them to agree with you on every single isssue?
I never said anything close to that; I used the word ADJUDICATE.
Main Entry: ad·ju·di·cate
Pronunciation: &-'jü-di-"kAt
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -cat·ed; -cat·ing
Date: 1775
transitive senses : to settle judicially
intransitive senses : to act as judge
That's ridiculous! I think political strategist see this as REALISM. An argument could be made on both sides on who is being the most delusional. . .especially on this thread.
If a blatantly unconstitutional law such as this one reaches the Supreme Court, it demonstrates a dismal failure of the three prior bodies to uphold the Constitution.
Not everything is black and white...cc
Principle is...owk
297 posted on 3/28/02 9:22 AM Hawaii-Aleutian by OWK
so is propaganda/bias...fC
bias vs Truth...
I'm asking you to read the entire bill. You're right: some things ARE black and white. Please read the entire bill is one of them. It means please read the entire bill.
Well there you have it, NOTHING is worth fighting for, everything is negociable. Good thing you were not at the Alamo.
Pray tell,.. enlighten us to the responsiblities of the three branches of our Government.
Even though you do not know the educational level of, nor the Government experience some here have,.. please educate us all.
I'm sincerely interested in your opinion and views on how each branch should have responded to the CFR issue.
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.