A Bush Hater's Poll

Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

This is an unofficial quick and dirty presidential poll. Apparently, there is a good sized contingent on Free Republic that believes that President Bush is:

1. Not conservative enough
2. Not pro-life
3. Is a gun-grabber
4. Is a federal power-grabber
5. Will appoint liberal judges
6. Is a globalist
7. Is in it just for oil
8. Is too soft on immigration
9. Is too soft (or too hard) on Israel
10. Is a crook
11. All of the above
12. None of the above
13. Other (you name it)

Please list the numbers that best match the reasons you don't like Bush (or state other reasons if not on the list) and state whether you believe that President Bush should be defeated even if it means installing a Democrat in the Whitehouse.

Conversely, if you believe President Bush should be re-elected, please state why.

Please state who you would like to see win the Presidency in 2004 and whether or not you believe he/she has a chance of winning.

Thanks,
Jim

[rdf]

Jim,

This is a needlessly hysterical title.

I don't think I'll surprise anyone, since I've said the same things here forever.

I supported GWB in Nov. of 2000, and told friends to vote for him, with their eyes open.

I told everyone to expect some disappointments, especially, but not solely, on education, immigration, and affirmative action. The results have been worse than I thought they would be.

Still, we have a two-party system, and I believe, as of now, that GWB will get the 2004 GOP nomination.

If so, I plan on voting for him again, and telling other conservatives to bite the bullet and do it again.

The Dems will give us a worse choice.

If we get a good Reagan conservative in the GOP primaries, I'll vote for him, not expecting him to beat Bush.

In the meantime, I'll praise GWB when he does well, as I did when he gave such fine speeches right after 9/11, or when he made some good appointments to the bench and some other slots in the administration. I'll give him *ell when he stabs us in the back, as he did on affirmative action and ESCR, and I'll seek to promote grass roots efforts to accomplish what he won't take on, such as Ward Connerly's Racial Privacy initiative in CA.

I'm not sure why you started this thing, but these are my honest replies as of now.

I am a conservative and a Republican.

I am not a "Bush Republican."

Circumstance do change in politics, and my actions 12 months from now could be different from what I guess here.

Cheers,

Richard F.

[Bommer]

Well I'm consistant pal and I hold him to the same standards as I held Clinton. I knew him before you did living for over 20 years in Texas. He is not the same man, believe me. He is worse. In Texas he change the tone of Ma Richards politics, and dominated the Democraps with Republican beliefs. In Washington, He changed the tone of the past 8 years, is hated by the Democraps, dividing his own party (see all the Conservatives that have announced retirement) and has adopted liberal policys. Did Reagan do this? Is 'W' better than Reagan? He is the standard that ALL Republicans should meet.

[LasVegasMac]

By no means do I hate GWB - I voted for the boy and will do so again. BUT - #8 is a sticking point for me - especially the illegal / uncontrolled aspects.

LVM

[Ford Fairlane]

1,4,5,6,&8 - and sometimes 3

George W Bush is a moderate, blue blood, "Rockefeller" Republican, and a big government globalist, as was his father, and his grandfather.

That said, he is better than any democrat and is the only republican that will get enough financial backing to win.

I personally would like to see an Alan Keyes / Walter E. Williams ticket in 2004 but that will never happen.

[ArneFufkin]

They are no longer law breakers. They are legally resident aliens. Let's count them, log them, assure them and vet them.

Tooth, I honestly see no other choice. Clinton and his vote stealers opened the spigot. What's done is done. The KEY is removing the parasite element from our taxpayer teat.

If your line in the sand is the unacceptable concept of an amnesty ... we're hopelessly adrift for discourse. Amnesty makes everying legal. It's a tool to break up the logjam. It's worth it.

If you can show me a sane scheme to arrest, process and deport 3-5 million illegal foreigners .... I'll lend an ear. I see no such reality.

Saberman, my only priority is as follows: 1. Keep our Americans alive. 2.)Process and identify all the invisible people skipping around America todday! How? Entice the hidden millions to show themselves and be counted and vetted for pain with a trustworthy amnesty. Bring everyone into the community but seize their entitlements! If bad-faithed local counties or States oppose the program, Marine Inspector can stand on the sidewalk outside LaRaza, within the queues at the County Welfare Agency, CALTRAN center or that check cashing place that is SO damn convenient for the newbees.

Amnesty is a fait accompi, IMO, friend. Time to move forward from that eventuality.

[Amelia]

You seem to be under the impression that the Bushbots' spin should be considered unassailable fact. You are wrong!

Well. *whimper* I guess I better just crawl back under my rock, huh?

/sarcasm

Want to tell my WHY I'm wrong, backed up with facts, or should I just believe it because YOU said so?

[Quicksilver]

The right man is in the White House, now we need to focus our attention on fixing the House and Senate. There is serious work to do before real change can be achieved.

He [George W. Bush] is, thank God -- and will be for the next six and a half years -- my President. [credited to Brian Allen]

[zeaal]

#8

[terilyn]

#13 for me.

I support President Bush and will vote for him again.

Maybe I'm not "conservative" enough for some here, but I know what I want in a President, (and what I don't want).

I want a man who the Country respects...Check

I want a man who respects the Country...Check

I want a man who respects the office he holds...Check

I want a man who respects his wife & family...Check

I want a man who respects our military and will fight for what is right for them...Check

I want a man who believes in God...Check

I want a man who is truthful and honest and remembers that he doesn't serve just those who voted for him...Check

I want a man who can beat the dems at their own game, it's our only chance...Check

I want a man who will appoint conservative judges, it's our only chance to stop the backslide...Check

I want a man who doesn't force a tear for effect, but isn't afraid to shed one from the heart...Check

I want a man who forces the presstitutes to spend August, miserable, in Crawford Texas ;)...Check

I want a man who isn't afraid to walk out to the pitcher's mound during the World Series, regardless of any threat to his own life, and can deliver a perfect strike...Check

So you see, my wants are pretty simple. George W. Bush has proved to me to be a terrific leader.

Go George Go!

[lasereye]

if you believe President Bush should be re-elected, please state why.

I interpret this to mean instead of his likely opponents as opposed to anyone I could think of. Therefore, he should be reelected.

1. He's the only one (of his likely opponents) I trust to prosecute the anti-terrorism war. That alone is reason to reelect him.
2. His judicial picks have been as conservative as Ronald Reagan's. That alone is also reason to reelect him.
3. He is pro-life. If Congress passes a partial birth abortion ban, he'll definitely sign it.
4. He remains committed to seeing the tax cut through, and probably making it permanent if he can get a more favorable congressional mix.
5. He has not backed off his position on Social Security retirement accounts - potentially a huge benefit to workers, especially those with most of their career ahead of them. There's no way it would pass the current Senate, but if he gets a more favorable Congress, he'll introduce it.

He's been a disappointment on spending, CFR and steel tariffs. You can't have everything. The things above are substantial. I'm not one of these all or nothing (which means nothing) dingbats.

[carenot]

A post as long as #502 is wasted on me and probably many other readers. All that hard work and I still have no idea where you stand.

You didn't read it?
Why not?

[terilyn]

"There is no magical shortcut. If Ron Paul (or Pat Buchanan or Alan Keyes or anyone) were to somehow wake up tomorrow as president (and everything else was unchanged), he would either begin governing differently than he now speaks or he wouldn't begin governing at all."

BRAVO!!!

It's real easy to talk the talk, when you aren't required to walk the walk.

[ArneFufkin]

Bommer, it's a 50-50 government with Tom Daschele controlling the institutional clock. Bush needs to send American soldiers to their deaths. He needs that political capital as CIC. He can't slapfight Daschele successfully ... we all wish he would, but there is no upside for him in the political propaganda. Bush has accepted his fate. He needs to wage war ON ISLAM. Not Islamists. ISLAM. Islam's culture and legal foundation is COMPLETELY at War with our American Constitution. W knows it, and he fears it mightily I sense. Sharon knows it, Putin knows it, Blair knows it ... who'll finally articulate the TRUTH? This ain't sleeper cells in extreme and violent dogma ... EXTREME and violent dogma is Islam, and all the grown ups have a grim acknowledgement at hand.

Things are bigger than CFR and the Education Bill. Life and Death stuff. I'm not going to blow that off, that's THE controlling mindset in the Bush WH. As IT bloody well should be, I might add!

Regards sir!

[ArneFufkin]

Bommer, it's a 50-50 government with Tom Daschele controlling the institutional clock. Bush needs to send American soldiers to their deaths. He needs that political capital as CIC. He can't slapfight Daschele successfully ... we all wish he would, but there is no upside for him in the political propaganda. Bush has accepted his fate. He needs to wage war ON ISLAM. Not Islamists. ISLAM. Islam's culture and legal foundation is COMPLETELY at War with our American Constitution. W knows it, and he fears it mightily I sense. Sharon knows it, Putin knows it, Blair knows it ... who'll finally articulate the TRUTH? This ain't sleeper cells in extreme and violent dogma ... EXTREME and violent dogma is Islam, and all the grown ups have a grim acknowledgement at hand.

Things are bigger than CFR and the Education Bill. Life and Death stuff. I'm not going to blow that off, that's THE controlling mindset in the Bush WH. As IT bloody well should be, I might add!

Regards sir!

[terilyn]

"They're looking for a disappointment so they can withdraw from the system."

Well said.

[Sabertooth]

Are you sure about that?

From a recent Washington Times article...

More than one-quarter of all immigrants winning legal residence in the United States in the past three years were once here illegally and took advantage of an expired law letting them gain legal status, according to an advocacy group's report released yesterday.      

The Federation for American Immigration Reform, which wants stricter limits on immigration, said the number of people adjusting their status skyrocketed after Congress passed a law in 1994, named 245(i) after its location in the immigration code, that let them apply for a green card without having to leave the United States.      

Since then, almost 1 million people who entered the country illegally or overstayed their visas have gained green cards. In 2000, they made up 28.3 percent of new legal residents; in 1999 they made up 25.4 percent, and in 1998 they made up 29.4 percent.     

"People aren't getting the truth about 245(i) — it's literally taking over our legal immigration system," said Dan Stein, executive director of the federation. "You're crowding out people who play by the rules and transforming the program into a permanent feature of the immigration system."

... "Apparently our elected officials in Washington see no correlation between giving one-quarter of all legal immigration slots to people who came here illegally, and other people making the decision to come here illegally," he said.
LINK

Note that the figure of nearly a million doesn't cover all of the Illegals Amnestied by various incarnations of Clinton's Section 245(i).

The law, called 245i, was first enacted in 1994 and allowed all illegal immigrants to apply to become permanent residents.

First they had to find a sponsor, an immediate family member here legally or an employer, then pass an INS background check and pay $1,000. Nearly 1.5 million illegal immigrants have become legal under 245i, nearly 12,000 of them from countries considered sponsors of terrorism.
LINK

I've just seen the note from Marine Inspector that indicates I may have been in error in my statement that all of the Amnestied Illegals displace law-abiding immigrant candidates (flagging him for clarification here). He's indicated that the number is closer to 50%. If that's the case, then given this figure of almost 1.5 million Amnesties under 245(i) since 1994, about 750,000 legal immigrants were displaced by Illegals.

The other 750,000 Amnesties apparently busted our immigration caps.

Is this an acceptable immigration policy?

[Sabertooth]

No. 12, with the possible exception of No. 8.

As always, I appreciate your far-mindedness.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

Nothing like bringing another unrelated argument from thread to thread.

[Quicksilver]

Thanks to Jim Jeffords, we still haven't had that chance. I'm hoping for 2002.

We'll need a supermajority (60) in the Senate to have that chance. Better get busy.

He [George W. Bush] is, thank God -- and will be for the next six and a half years -- my President. [credited to Brian Allen]