One Less Republican in Camp

Sierra Times ^ | 3-29-02 | Colonel Dan

[Sabertooth]

Well, there is the issue that Sabertooth IS a lying sack of Clinton...

This brings up the issue of your lack of substance.

Refusal to debate, refusal to support your claim, but perfect willingness to resort to unsubstatiated name-calling. Not unexpected among your crowd.

[Matchett-PI]

Colonel, there are some people who are just too naive and idealistic to realize the reality that "politics is the art of the possible". The margins are too thin in the House and Senate for it to be _possible_ for Bush to make much headway just yet.

We need to make sure we get more conservative Republicans elected to Congress so as to make it possible to advance our agenda. But if Bush isn't relected, and thus the Republican Party loses power, we are back to square one.

The Marxist DemocRATS understand incrementalism, why don't you? You need to be less emotion-driven and more circumspect in your decisions. Pay attention to David Horowitz. He KNOWS what he's talking about.

And if you are looking to place "blame", look no further than the voters who elect people to represent them. Your views do not represent most of them, therefore you could never be elected, and neither would any of those whom you would support who would run in a third party.

Face REALITY.

[CIB-173RDABN]

If you see these post as anything then an attack on the Bush administration, then go ahead and discuss the issues with him.

[oursacredhonor]

"Please explain to me why the current active military is having an orgasmic love affair with President Bush."

He respects them and they return the sentiment. What does that have to do with anything?

[Sabertooth]

If you see these post as anything then an attack on the Bush administration...

Many have been, including some of mine. So?

Are we not supposed to express our displeasure?

[uncbob]

Don't let the door hit your butt on the way out!

somebody already used that response on this thread

It was as cliched and meaningless as yours

[oursacredhonor]

Very well said.

[rbmillerjr]

How dare you view you displeasure with anything that Bush has done. Why is it so hard to see that we must enact liberal legislation as part of the plan to retain power. Dont you see?

You must be a Bush hating disruptor,,,,,,you likely never voted for Bush anyway, standing on your pedestal of PRINCIPLE, hah what is principle if your out of office -

[Sabertooth]

"Don't let the door hit your butt on the way out! "

Don't you understand?

That's the rallying cry of the "Big-Tent Republicans."

[uncbob]

I might add
One other aspect of this non VETO

The democrats have Bush and his GOP advisers RUNNING SCARED

When you fail to do what is right because of what your opponents might do or say THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE DOING

[Sabertooth]

You must be a Bush hating disruptor,,,,,,you likely never voted for Bush anyway, standing on your pedestal of PRINCIPLE, hah what is principle if your out of office -

You're absolutely right, but I have a confession...

I'm so deep undercover, I voted for Dubya in the Primary and the General Elections, and for his Dad in '92.

Shhh... keep it on the QT!

[RamsNo1]

Thanks for your opinion. There are many on this website and in DC that want to squash our freedom of speech and we must not let them! I seriously doubt if I will vote at all in 2002 or 2004. I am not just talking about Bush but about some of my state representatives. Keep searching for a better way, my friend!

[rbmillerjr]

btw,,,,,,I'm also registering Independent On Tuesday. I'll continue to vote for conservatives and Bush next go round if he straightens up,,,,,,,,,BUT NO MORE CAMPAIGNING OR CONTRIBUTING FROM ME TO THE RNC OR OTHER gop GROUPS.

I dont care what you Party Hacks think, I used to be one too. I havent left the GOP, the GOP left me.

[Howlin]

Why does the concept of majority rules (even in this party) seem to allude you?

[uncbob]

Colonel, there are some people who are just too naive and idealistic to realize the reality that "politics is the art of the possible".

I guess all those GOP members of congress who fought against it were dolts

BTW One of the advantages of having a member of your party as president is his veto power that way the opposition needs a VETO PROOF MAJORITY in both houses . You may have heard of that concept. Course if the president is afraid to use his veto you don't need that majority

[tpaine]

We must find a way to 'devolve' their hold on this power.

Absolutely. And that is your job. You develop a detailed plan, with charts and graphs and ensure that it's a fool-proof way of doing this and don't post until you're finished.

Typical authoritarian. - Giving orders that somehow don't apply to YOU. -- Whatta clown.

[NittanyLion]

Why does the concept of majority rules (even in this party) seem to allude you?

Let's take CFR as an example, seeing as how it's a hot topic right now. What follows is the percent of republicans that voted in favor of CFR, by house:

House of Reps: 18.9%
Senate: 22.4%

Is that a majority? You understand, the veto can be used for any reason. There is no requirement to sign a bill just because it was passed.