Some problems are hard to correct.
This is for all the reactionary absolutists and fringe extremists, who enjoy speaking, but for some reason are hard of hearing.
Posted on 06/05/2002 1:20:54 PM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
Let me just say up front that I am not addressing you if you voted for George W. Bush in 2000 and regret it. The same goes for those of you who voted for Bush and insist on holding his feet to the fire on the important issues. If, however, you cast your vote for Bush, still believe he is the only hope for America and intend to support every move he makes without so much as a raised eyebrow, this is for you.
It has been nearly a year-and-a-half since George W. Bush, the savior of conservatism, descended from on high to begin his earthly reign in Washington, D.C. Republicans assured us that he would restore integrity to the White House and would be a marked improvement over the promiscuous Bill Clinton. Well, in all honesty, that could have been accomplished by electing a neutered chimp to the office of president.
During the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush the man proved to be a nice break from Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Unlike Gore, Bush had a more likable...well, he actually had a personality. He also possessed the unique ability to address the American people without the smug and condescending vibe Clinton exuded. However, when it came to policy, George W. Bush the candidate failed to demonstrate that he would govern any differently than his Democrat counterparts.
Still, throughout the campaign, there was a loyal group of Bush supporters who would take offense at even the slightest implication that their candidate was anything but a staunch conservative. Even now, they continue to stand by their man, and I find this to be rather perplexing.
Perhaps those who have pledged their undying allegiance to President Bush could answer a few questions for me, in no particular order of course:
• How would you have reacted if Bill Clinton had signed the Patriot Act into law and given the government sweeping new surveillance powers?
• Would you have criticized a Democrat president for signing a $26 billion education-spending bill?
• Did you feel betrayed when Bush signed Campaign Finance Reform into law?
• What do you think about Bush's position on granting amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants?
• Would you have tolerated a Democrat proposal for federally funded faith-based initiatives?
• What would your reaction have been if a Democrat had said, "No one should have to pay more than a third of their income to the federal government"?
• What do you think about the president's granting of Permanent Most Favored Nation status to China?
• What's the difference between Bush and the Democrats on the issue of farm subsidies?
• How would you react if a Democrat president sent a $2.13 trillion budget to Congress?
• Would you have stood for a Democrat saying "No!" to arming airline pilots?
• What would your reaction have been if a Democrat had pushed for the federalization of airport security?
• Are you willing to stand by and let the Bush administration cater to the environmentalists on the global warming issue?
• What do you think about Bush's call for a Patient's Bill of Rights?
• What one thing has Bush done that sets him apart from the Democrats?
• It's been a year-and-a-half since Bush took office. When do we start to see a decrease in the size and scope of government? For that matter, when do we start to see even a remote indication that this administration will think about doing anything to try to limit the federal government?
This list is by no means exhaustive, but I would really be interested in some answers. Perhaps it would help shed some light on the mindset of modern compassionate conservatives.
The fact that a Republican president is governing like a Democrat isn't surprising. What's amazing to me is that there are a few select Bush supporters out there who cannot—or will not—utter one word of criticism against their president for any reason. In their minds this man is the epitome of conservatism, and to question his actions would be to question their own beliefs and cause them to wonder why they supported him in the first place.
The way I see it there can only be two explanations for this: 1) these people really and truly believe in what Bush is doing, or 2) they do not wish to face up to the real reason they voted for him — he was simply a slightly more palatable choice than Al Gore.
You can get a busload of locals from the hood to go vote Dem, but try hitting them with a fundraising appeal. Uh uh.
McAullife is like the Crocodile Hunter ... he shows up with a bucket of flesh and they all scurry onto the bank. Terry feeds them carefully.
And if your were king of the GOP you would have nominated who?
I always believed he was. He had to sign some crummy democratic bills to rebuild our military after Carter ran it into the ground but he never stopped trying to advance conservatism. I don't see Bush doing this at all.
The music has just began to play for Bush.
Vince Foster died of a gunshot wound to the head and yet there are no x-rays of his head. The news media fail to report this and instead report the obviously false cover stories supplied to "explain" it.
I agree that the media are complicit in these crimes but I disagree that anything short of bankruptcy will stop the damage they are doing to our republic.
I have taken many opportunities to encourage Freepers to cancel their subscriptions to biased local newspapers. My wife misses the local news, but I cannot tolerate giving these people many hundreds of dollars a year to lie to me and to undermine my freedoms. When I see a front page picture of the hole in Ron Brown's head in my local paper, I will reconsider. And not before then.
It isn't just a homily. And it isn't rocket science either. Foundational principles should be reflected by behavior - and that ISN'T just my opinion.
LOL.... sure if that makes you feel better. What about those of us who don't listen to Rush? Also you seem to discount that Rush listeners might have a mind of their own? Kind of presumptious don't ya think?
Some problems are hard to correct.
This is for all the reactionary absolutists and fringe extremists, who enjoy speaking, but for some reason are hard of hearing.
I think it's a difference between seeing the forest from the trees. If you are too close to either party every difference appears huge. If you look at what they actually do when in office on the big issues there is not much of a difference between your average republican and average democrat. This is especially true over long time periods.
Knowing how he misused the FBI files, I would have been very glad that some of the new powers included a four year expiration date.
• Would you have criticized a Democrat president for signing a $26 billion education-spending bill?
A Democrat bill would not have had the beginning of accountability testing and would not have had the beginning of a voucher system. If you don't think turning education around is not a fundamental key to solving a lot of problems in this Republic, then we aren't on the same page.
• Did you feel betrayed when Bush signed Campaign Finance Reform into law?
No, I was p*ssed John McCain and Jefford's betrayals meant I had to send money to the NRA to get it declared unconstitutional. And I know Bush was p*ssed, too. But I don't believe in marching in red coats in straight lines at the enemy. I come from Revolutionary stock and sharpshooter stock and we know that sometimes you have to be sneaky to achieve an objective.
• What do you think about Bush's position on granting amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants?
This is garbage. Section 245(i) only gives waivers for people who are already legally here that they don't have to go home and leave their legal jobs and families if their current status expires and the INS is late in processing their renewal or change of status paperwork.
• Would you have tolerated a Democrat proposal for federally funded faith-based initiatives?
You betcha. Faith based Teen Challenge is one of my favorite charities to get kids off drugs. It works because it is based on Jesus Christ, like AA is based on a "higher power."
• What would your reaction have been if a Democrat had said, "No one should have to pay more than a third of their income to the federal government"?
About time. And how about nothing? I have supported abolishing the income tax and going to a national value added tax or sales tax, for decades.
• What do you think about the president's granting of Permanent Most Favored Nation status to China?
China is one heck of a dangerous adversary. However, I remember in Asimov's Foundation Trilogy how some dangerous adversaries were undercut by the power of trade. There may be great merit in the argument that trade and the missile defense system and Aegis for Taiwan are our best cards. Meanwhile I try hard not to buy anything Made in China, but that is hard.
• What's the difference between Bush and the Democrats on the issue of farm subsidies?
Nothing. They both want to win the Senate in 2002 so they can call the shot on judges.
• How would you react if a Democrat president sent a $2.13 trillion budget to Congress?
I voted for John Anderson in 1980 because of my concern about deficit spending. I won't make that mistake again. We're in a fight to the death with the liberals, and every vote counts.
• Would you have stood for a Democrat saying "No!" to arming airline pilots?
We're not done yet. Mineta at Transportation is a Democrat. Congress is going to try to overrule him. I'm supporting Congress in going for a law to overrule him, but the problem is the airline corporations themselves who are concerned about the liability, and also the problem of how do you prevent someone from impersonating a pilot getting on with a weapon. No matter. This one is personal, and I won't give up the fight.
• What would your reaction have been if a Democrat had pushed for the federalization of airport security?
Bush was against it. I'm against it. But Congress which is comprised of the representatives of we the people in these United States under our Constitution has spoken.
• Are you willing to stand by and let the Bush administration cater to the environmentalists on the global warming issue?
I love the way Bush maneuvers in the briar patch. He is great fun to watch. And he nixed Kyoto, so no big thang about the EPA report to the U.N. that was mandated to be in by June, 2002, by Congress.
• What do you think about Bush's call for a Patient's Bill of Rights?
Seems to me I remember the Democrats hawking HMO's as the greatest thing for the masses since sliced bread a decade ago, and now they are as concerned as I was then about the problems with HMO's and the superiority of a doctor's judgment over a for profit corporation. Laughing my head off mostly.
Bush did a good job of getting a decent PBOR in Texas that included tort reform.
• What one thing has Bush done that sets him apart from the Democrats?
1. Democrat would be throwing living embryos in the waring blender with federal funds now to make stem cells. They'd still be federally funding overseas abortions.
2. Democrats would never have passed a tax cut.
3. Democrats would never have made the War on Terror non-negotiable or enunciated the Bush Doctrine of not allowing nations to harbor them, nor called the terrorists evil. Democrats would not be planning how to get Saddam.
4. Democrats would never have put testing and accountability and the beginning of vouchers in the education bill, and begun to set up accountability for teachers (teacher retraining).
5. Democrats would never have nixed the Kyoto Treaty.
6. Democrats would never have gone ahead with missile defense system.
7. Democrats would have kissed the feet of the Chinese and said we were partly to blame for EP-1 collision, like my dogsh*t Senator, Feinstein, did, and dishonored our crew there.
8. I'm running out of time.... The most important thing Bush has done is to keep the Democrats from doing horrific things that aren't even in the news, because his hot bod is in the White House, and not Gore's.
• It's been a year-and-a-half since Bush took office. When do we start to see a decrease in the size and scope of government? For that matter, when do we start to see even a remote indication that this administration will think about doing anything to try to limit the federal government?
When you bring us the head of Osama, Saddam, and a bunch of other guys. Till then, I'll pay whatever it costs, including the idiot farm bill.
My turn: If the conservatives who eat their young have their way, we won't have a Republican Senate next year and we'll have a far worse time than we've had since Jeffords defected. I guess your answer to Jeffords defection is that you think is was such a good idea that you're going to join him???
One brief example - CFR. Exactly how does this correlate to the 1st Amendment? Another example - the inability of the Dept of Justice to reign in unlawful searches and seizures - 4th Amendment. Still another - the Republican congress' refusal to cut back on government pork with the Dept of Education.
These examples are repeated a thousand times over at the congressional level.
It is no mere 'pontification'. Your glib dismissal of our country's foundational principles is disappointing - as it is an attitude more akin to Ted Kennedy than Ronald Reagan.
Finally. Now what about the CFR is unconstitutional?
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.