Posted on 06/01/2002 6:23:27 PM PDT by TLBSHOW
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:35 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON -- Occasional grumbling by some prominent conservatives about President Bush sometimes overshadows his extremely solid support among stalwart Republicans and conservatives around the country.
Many Republicans and Democrats seem to agree that support by itself does not tilt the 2002 elections toward the GOP. Some, however, say it could offset the gains the party out of the White House -- Democrats, in this case -- historically has made in midterm elections.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
As if anyone on the other side of the aisle is going to seal the borders and ship all Mexicans home.
I am glad you repeated your boast, and I am copying it so that I can quote you whenever you tell us how HARD you have worked for Republicans, and how MUCH you love your country.
I have a feeling that you and your "group" are really annoying.
You must understand that goes both ways. Who cares if some chose a Rino? Everyone can do as they please.
No excuses for Clinton, but who let Saddam off the hook in '91?
While I voted for Bush the Elder in '92, I understand why many votes he thought were his by right went elsewhere. He ran a lackluster campaign and never took off the gloves against Clinton.
When a candidate loses votes and thus elections, it's always, always his fault.
I believe Ross Perot put Clinton into office, but only because George HW Bush frittered away votes and political capital so foolishly that Perot was able to scoop up many of his disenchanted voters.
Will Dubya repeat the mistake? That remains to be seen.
But I don't believe that Bush Loyalists help their cause any with the "we can win without you" and "don't let the door hit you in the a**" comments. And doubting whether those who've soured on Bush ever voted for him in the first place strikes me as wishful thinking. The President's numbers look good now, but we have to keep in mind that he starts from a hole in the popular vote and it wouldn't take much of a swing in a few other states to make things very difficult for him.
So let me ask you...
If some of the President's "outreach" plans compromise principles so much that they cost more votes than they gain, who's responsible if the Dems take back the White House in 2004?
Is that the only place you can pray?
It's my guess that people who put together winning campaigns care quite a bit.
Those voters are known as "Swing Voters."
The United States Senate AND the UN.
Well, so are those who apologyze often for what Bush has done. I do get tired of hearing the silly excuses.
We bother no pagans. We just want our rights to do our own thing . The Constitution gave us a right of Freedom to do so, but those who are on power highs have chosen to change the wording a little, to the meaning of "is."
It's typical. Even "our own party" tries to dictate.
I often see people around here saying prayers in groups at restaurants, we have prayer grops that meet at lunch hours in businesses, and there is an after-school Bible Study.
Youth ministers are encouraged to eat in the cafeteria with the kids from their churches.
So I am trying to understand why you think we can't have prayer in public places. Did you miss the National Prayer Service at the National Cathedral, led by President Bush? Did you miss the prayer at the Inauguration?
Please explain whee you live and what has been prohibited Thank you.
CFR couldn't win with Clinton holding the pen. It had no steam out side the media/Beltway circle jerk.
Plus, I doubt it will all be held unconstitutional (though it ought to be).
The "votes" we're talking about here are out and out "my way or the highway" kinds.
Guess He'll have to vote for Nader again.
Are YOU going to suggest a box somewhere if we chose a public place?Get the idea? YOU would prefer we move rather than just leave us alone. We "offended" YOU, and political correctness doesn't allow for that. We must be put out of YOUR way, no?
...No group prayer on public grounds.
Weren't you just talking up about #113 about the separation of Church and State..... now which is it you want? Separation or the freedom to do as you please..... If it's the latter then you had better help get some people appointed to the Judicial system that may help your cause and the Senators to help get them confirmed, don't you think?
It is this fact that has all the "purists" in a tizzy. They along with the DNC are mad because they cannot divide Pres. Bush's base. It's funny how they try to divide his base on a thread that shows their plans have failed miserably thus far.
This is the first time I've heard of this. What is your specific complaint? I have never been chased off public property for praying, and the Good Lord knows I've done it often enough.
Nice cover, and it does offer plausible deniability. But neither could have stopped the American CoC had he decided to finish the job in Baghdad.
And we'd have been spared a lot of the subsequent nonsense, like Oslo.
BTW, whose idea was it to make that Gulf War a UN operation in the first place?
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.