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.
EBUCK
AAAHHH aaahhh aaaa I've become - comfortably numb."
I would hardly call it "fun". What I would define as fun, would be watching a person I helped elect keep their campaign promises and uphold conservative values. Yep, that would sure be fun.
On this thread? Simply to point out that it's silly to take three isolated uncredited quotes and use them to launch a thread which seems to imply (based on three quotes) that FR May Not Be Such A Great Place For Grass Roots Conservatism bla bla bla.
Think about it, I clicked on the thread (as we all do) because of its title, thinking that maybe there was some kind of legitimate complaint contained in it ("oh no, FR isn't a good place for grass roots conservatism? I wonder why??!"), but instead I got... three lousy quotes culled from who knows where, which turned out to do little more than defend President Bush for CFR - not exactly the biggest crime against Grass Roots Conservatism I can imagine. So I admit, this annoyed me, and I said so.
Admittedly it's taken me more subsequent posts to explain all this and get this point through than I might have liked... :) But if I can reach just one person.....
Don't know what we would do without your superior wisdom to guide us:)
Yeah, I get that a lot (sarcasm noted ;)
I hope you are right. I am sure that GW hopes you are right. Unfortunately he may need them to offset votes he may have lost by the above two actions.
Sir, I respect your right to vote as you see fit...
However, I am so d@mned tired of that approach...
It's the reason we're in the fix we're in, and the reason that our liberties are in danger...
The Founders had a vision of an electorate which was informed and principled, and that includes voting for what you believe to be correct and in the best interests of the Republic and your fellow man...
I'm sorry, but voting for the lesser of two evils does NOT go hand in hand with that vision...
And yes, I'm a registered Libertarian.
I campaigned on behalf of Bush, and voted for him. He broke a pretty damn important campaign promise - don't expect that I and others won't note that. I'll likely vote for Bush again in 2004, assuming this is an isolated incident.
Based on your homepage and comments on this thread, I suspect your problem is more with libertarians than anything else. What did a libertarian do to you?
For the record, I agree with you and Sen. McConnell that the 60-day limit should be held unconstitutional by SCOTUS.
The President was dealt a lousy hand on this one by Jim Jeffords, Ken Lay, Enron and Arthur Andersen. But he got the House bill, increased hard money and expedited review by SCOTUS.
While we may disagree on how the Prez played this one, as conservatives lets stay focused and united on the overall agenda.
Freegards.
I'm right along side you in the hope that the SCOTUS does the right thing here.
Cheers,
EBUCK
(boy, its' not often that a lil LibTar diruptor like me gets the ear of the JR, thanks)
Cool, I'm with you.
And, sorry, about the nefarious "D" I threw in there. It's just that you said almost the same thing my piss-poor rep did. No one should have to endure that kind of smear, especially here LOL.
Cheers,
EBUCK
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.