Conservatives not satisfied with Bush's record

The Washington Times ^ | June 18, 2002 | Ralph Z. Hallow

[jimkress]

Conservative lawmakers and activists disappointed with President Bush's first 18 months in office are calling into question his tactics and strategy in advancing the conservative agenda.

"The president for the most part has been our guy," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, Texas Republican and a prominent conservative on Capitol Hill. "A few times we disagree."

[hchutch]

Actually, I disagree. I think it's a step in the right direction. So it's 50/50. The current public housing programs are 100% the wrong way, IMHO. So it's safe to argue that we've made a step in the right direction with this proposal.

Even if it were 40/60 tax credits/giveaways, it's still a step our way. We can come back in a couple of years and make it 60/40, 70/30, or even that 90/10 you want. Think of it that way.

[caddie]

Thank you, Teacher317, and I agree with your excerpted post.

I remember standing out in the rain last November in front of the Indiana Statehouse, spending a perfectly good Saturday to do so, protesting in favor of Bush and against the Rat Gore, while numerous motorists flipped me the bird and pedestrians said nasty things to me.

Basically I was willing to be humiliated for the GOP and for W.

I feel tremendously betrayed.

Now I feel that W would not be worth crossing the street to urinate on, were he aflame.

[Lazamataz]

Dane has a point. We're not going to fix things overnight. The question is, do we fall on our swords and let things become much worse, or do we start the slow U-turn to get things to the way they should be?

Look, I'm okay with a slow U-turn.

But dammit, man, turn the nation to the RIGHT when you are U-ing. Not to the LEFT -- just in case you can't complete your goal.

[AAABEST]

Like it or not the left will not be stopped by any legal method.

I'm with you, conventional conformist tactics are losing the battles and the war. I've been shouting this to anyone who'll listen for years now.

Let's start the "Fist to the Teeth" club and start throwing some smack down on the left's ass.

[Lazamataz]

Actually, I disagree. I think it's a step in the right direction. So it's 50/50. The current public housing programs are 100% the wrong way, IMHO. So it's safe to argue that we've made a step in the right direction with this proposal.

This is a very valid point and one I had not considered.

[hchutch]

I think both have applied. Seeing as conservatives are not turning out in those numbers they have decided to take a much slower road, and they have to do things in a manner that will attract more moderates and still fit what they believe.

It might sound like a cliche, but there is more than one way to skin a cat, and you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

[Roscoe]

...money taken from me at virtual gunpoint to give to other people in a totally socialist manner...

Blather.

Would rather build huge public housing projects than help people own private homes?

[Dane]

But because men and women are now private property owners, so Dane calls it capitalist.

Do you even think when you post, or do you just pound your keyboard with your fist, generating random characters?

Yes I think all the time and I think that making people private property owners is a worthy goal. To bad you think that is radical.

Gotta go for a while, will be back.

[meyer]

Look, home ownership is something better than the welfare system that the Dems run. Again, would you rather promote home ownership, or welfare-state dependency? The program's not perfect, but it's better than the alternative.

How about the alternative of no government money. Just lower the tax rates of all who actually pay them rather than stealing the money and giving it to the deadwood.

[Teacher317]

If only GWB would remember Ronaldus Magnus:

"Government is not the solution to our problem... government is the problem."

(Thanks and credit to B Knotts! I TOLD you I liked that post!)

[Lazamataz]

Yes I think all the time and I think that making people private property owners is a worthy goal. To bad you think that is radical.

Not if it is achieved by socialist means.

Gotta go for a while, will be back.

Don't hurry.

[Teacher317]

Yes I think all the time and I think that making people private property owners is a worthy goal.

MAKING people do anything (other than obey a small, well-defined code of laws) is NOT FReedom, Dane.

[Lazamataz]

Would rather build huge public housing projects than help people own private homes?

False dilemma. I offer other options: 1) Doing less of the former. 2) Doing neither outright.

[SerpentDove]

>> My next vote goes to the Constitution Party. I invite all to visit their website and read about what a candidate with REAL MORAL PRINCIPLES looks like! wwww.constitutionparty.com<<

Thanks. I will mull this over.

2004 may well be the first time in my life I have ever voted third-party. And I DON'T say that lightly.

[Fred Mertz]

Let's start the "Fist to the Teeth" club and start throwing some smack down on the left's ass.

Homey, where do I sign up?

[Teacher317]

Cool! I was there, too. Were you the one with the bullhorn? I was the one with the blaze orange sign on the Soldier Statue saying "I voted for George W. Bush." A shame the rain kept so many away.

[Dominic Harr]

The Bush apologists are advocating politicians doing bad things to buy votes, to guarantee re-election. Re-election over the good of the country. The politician's interests over the country's.

'Smart' politics. Just like the Ds do. Exactly what we've criticized the Ds for all these years.

In their minds, a Bush re-election is the goal, with 'doing the right thing' as a definite after-thought. And they insult the people wanting their elected officials to do the job we elected them to do.

[habs4ever]

Unfortunately, 9/11 upset the apple cart and because the threat is so severe, just why should Bush and his team be doing much else but trying to wipe put al Qaeda?? He's got a full plate and to expect him to rollback the welfare state or even make stab at it is for fantasists.His priorities changed.I'm glad they did, and glad he knows the dangers and glad that no Democrat has a hope in hell of getting near the WH in the next 6 yrs while this war has to be won.

[Palmetto]

Seeing as conservatives are not turning out in those numbers they have decided to take a much slower road, and they have to do things in a manner that will attract more moderates and still fit what they believe.

Give the conservatives a candidate they can vote for, and they will vote for him/her/it in droves.

All Pres. Bush is doing now is proving that those who voted 3rd party were right.

[Redleg Duke]

Yep, all these "conservatives", like that nitwit from Austinville, Ohio on Rush today are whining that Bush should stop worrying about the 2004 election and push through "their" agenda.

Yeah, sure, youbetcha! And then, when Hitlery gets in in 2005, everything passed will be not only overturned, but replaced with a draconian socialist substitute. But, then, these "conservatives" don't want anything fixed, they want everything broken so bad that a revolution results. That is the only way they hope to get their real "agenda" in place...on the blood of millions.

To all of you "conservatives" doing the whining, I suggest a nice, aged Stilton.