Skip to comments.
Bush Extremely Strong With Base (06/01/2002)
ap via newsday ^
| 5/31/2002
| Will Lester
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 ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; Political Humor/Cartoons
KEYWORDS: bush
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 641-650 next last
To: WRhine
Name the neo-cons in Reagan's admisistratios ; both terms. Oh, and do please stick to the actual meaning of that term : A Conservative / Republican, who was once a raving Socialist / Trotskyite / Stalinist. Otherswise, we're talking apples and oranges.
To: WIMom
I hearby nominate General Norman Schwarzkoff as POTUS, with Mark Levin as VEEP.
To: WIMom
All I know is that we are not alone. We are all scattered throughout the country but their are many of us. We have one thing in our favor. As Conservatives we realize that the 2nd amendment is very important. Unlike our liberal sheep counter-parts we are armed. To this day the marxist liberals have taken the nation slowly, they have gone slow like a frog put in luke warm water ans slowly boiled to death. The frog never resisted because it adjusted before it knew the temp was to hot for it to survive. Like that frog we are slowly boiling. We must hope for a day like that soon, where liberals get greedy and try to take to much to fast. This will have to come when they reach the gun issue, once the sheep who are neutral see this incursion, then we will have to speak up loudly and then we will need to rally the nation.
To: nopardons
I don't like that definition but whatever. Among other things it excludes me, and I think I am a rather unalloyed Neocon.
304
posted on
06/01/2002 10:18:32 PM PDT
by
Torie
To: Poohbah
A perfect example of ms. clinton not playing well in flyover country. The RAT Cong Carson from NE OK took two $1,000 checks from ms. clinton a year ago, never cashed them, and after doing a poll in a RAT district returned them because it showed he could lose if he accepted her money. She is not going to get elected President!
To: LiberalConspiracy
I am a Christian, as I assume most here are. But when I look at this nation, I can only see one way out of this. Violence. I seriously cannot figure out how we will ever rally this nation under the flag of freedom Why, because YOU don't like the way the country has evolved? This country is STILL under the same framework that the founders put into place. Who is your violence to be directed at? The VAST majority of the population think this is the only game in town and I am one of them . You had better think twice about "liberating" people that don't share your particular vision. You may just be surprised at the reaction you get. I can tell you this with no bravado. I will shoot on sight any person, group or organization that decides that "it is time". I don't care if they are a self styled "patriot" group, the Black Panthers, the KKK or foreign and domestic terrorists. They are all cut from the same cloth.
To: Texasforever
LMAO You must have forgotten the Vietnamese boat people the Haitian invasion not to mention the southern border. Look, I will debate facts NOT myths. Yep, and the facts are that immigration was not nearly the problem in the 1980s as it is today. Pretty much common sense, isn't it? Though I realize how much you Neo-Cons want to redefine the Reagan Presidency. Perhaps you should ponder this, during Reagan's time the Republican Party was highly unified. Under Bush it is slowly but surely coming apart. Reagan was smart enough not to alienate his core constituency like this president is doing and his dad did.
307
posted on
06/01/2002 10:22:30 PM PDT
by
WRhine
Comment #308 Removed by Moderator
To: F16Fighter
At what point, do
you take the blinders off and stop being a political naif ?
President Bush pushed through a tax cut fairly early on. Granted, it wasn't enough ; however, it was just the first step and he wants to do more. Not enough for you ?
The Education Bill has enough strings attached to it, as to hogtie the Dems, make Teddy red in the face and sputter, and have the NEA going ballistic. With a GOP majority in both Houses, President Bush will bring back bochers. Not enough for you ?
President Bush hs already changed the language on abortion. If sent a Bill against partial Birth Abortion, unlike the Toon, W will sign it. No enough for you ?
Of course I can go on and on, but what's the use ? You have no patience . Hint, hint ... no president is a supreme ruller. He can't magically do away with / change overnght,what the slow but oh so steady march of Socialistic entrenchments, made by Dems, for the past 70 + years.
To: Howlin
Please allow me to re-caption the pic:
"You mean the President wants to put a turnstile at the Mexican border? But that shouldn't bother Americans concerned about the enforcement of the law -- should it?"
To: WRhine
Yep, and the facts are that immigration was not nearly the problem in the 1980s as it is today. Pretty much common sense, isn't it? Though I realize how much you Neo-Cons want to redefine the Reagan Presidency. Perhaps you should ponder this, during Reagan's time the Republican Party was highly unified. Under Bush it is slowly but surely coming apart. Reagan was smart enough not to alienate his core constituency like this president is doing and his dad did. Yopu just have to be kidding. No one could be that ignorant of the times.
To: VRWC For Truth
Ma Klinton has broken more laws than Ma Barker. Can't just ONE stick??
To: Texasforever
Do not put patriots in the same catagory as racists. You speak just like a liberal. Do not think that we will stand idoly by while stupid sheep take our rights away. If you want to lose your rights, go right ahead, but don't think for a minute you are taking me or any other person who wants real freedom not this politically correct cultural socialism with you. Parents have a right to raise their kids with values and not have a socialist state go behind their backs with other beliefs. I have a right to speak about God anywhere I want. Every American has the right to know their true history not some socially engineered fake history where our founders are banned from school.
"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Samuel Clemens, author who wrote under the nom de plume, Mark Twain
To: concerned about politics
I guess we'll just have to sit it out until we find one. No big deal. Waiting for Godot?
To: LiberalConspiracy
The liberals are already too greedy. That day is long gone by. And I just heard tonight on the news Sarah Brady bought a rifle. The liberals are armed and they have money. The liberals want everything conservatives do, only they want it for their power base, not for 'we the people'. What the liberals want is total socialist/facist/communist control. They want absolute power. As long as there is opposition, they will never get the power they desire.
315
posted on
06/01/2002 10:26:07 PM PDT
by
WIMom
To: A Citizen Reporter
I'll take that bet, Monty, and what's behind door #2.
That would be chickens unhatched and ballots uncast.
Being cavalier about lost votes rarely wins elections.
To: LiberalConspiracy
o not put patriots in the same catagory as racists. I don't consider people that think the way to solve political problems is with a gun, PATRIOTS. Friend you may dream of revolution but you would rue the day.
To: LiberalConspiracy
Do not think that we will stand idoly by while stupid sheep take our rights away. Let me take a stab at this: anybody who doesn't agree with everything you say is a "stupid sheep," right?
318
posted on
06/01/2002 10:29:07 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: nopardons
Name the neo-cons in Reagan's admisistratios ; both terms. How about George Herbert Walker Bush and his entire staff that unfortunately was allowed greater power in Reagan's second term in preparation for his presidential bid in 1988.
319
posted on
06/01/2002 10:29:14 PM PDT
by
WRhine
To: Howlin
KKK - The dreaded Keyes-Klayman-Kristol triad!Maybe their signature attire should be that Mr. Rogers' sweater look. I can see it now.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 641-650 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson