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

[ArneFufkin]

The libs over at Bartcop and SmirkingChimp are smarter and more truthful than this element.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

I'd like to hear your reply to this:

And what do you call what Keyes and Klayman are doing by attacking the Conservatives?

Thanks!

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Oh, it's amazing! They are cheering these guys on! DUH!

[EternalVigilance]

Your cynical, nasty and lying attempts to attack Alan Keyes, by the crude and evil methods that you use, are apparent to all thinking people.

[ArneFufkin]

What's the matter, you thought your liberal buddy Arne couldn't handle me all by himself?

Yeah, you're the T Rex of lighting quick wit and wisecrackin' banter.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

And what do you call what Keyes and Klayman are doing by attacking the Conservatives?

Now that you bring it up, I'd like to hear that, too.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Your cynical, nasty and lying attempts to attack Alan Keyes, by the crude and evil methods that you use, are apparent to all thinking people.

ROFLMBO!

Dude, can't you be more original? You always post the same stuff to different people who don't agree with you. Is this a script you have saved as a .txt file? LOL!

[EternalVigilance]

Ah, so you're joining the worst disruptor on FR in his little game of strawmen and misdirection?

Why?

[B. A. Conservative]

If you have read and thought carefully about what I have suggested and come to the conclusion that I am done with the GOP, then I have not expressed my thoughts clearly. I will try again:

• The Democratic Party, home of the socialists, is the enemy of freedom and is on the verge of destroying the United States through a sustained destruction of both our credit and our currency.
• The GOP, touted as the loyal opposition to the Democratic Party, is by far the largest opposition political party and therefore far more likely to be capable of defeating the Democrats.
• Thanks to the misrepresentations by the media that are 90+% left-wing socialists themselves, elected Republicans have been convinced that most Americans are liberal and like the socialists' agenda.
• Thanks to this brainwashing, Republicans would rather be re-elected than actually be the loyal opposition and return to our Constitutional roots. Therefore Republicans now run as mini-socialists of the me-too party, saying they want the same things as Democrats but they just don't want as much or as as fast as Democrats.
• The media and the brainwashed Republicans are wrong.
• When Republicans run as mini-socialists, they lose elections. Conservatives don't vote for them or skip voting all together and the socialists always vote for the real thing, not the look alikes.
• Republicans have only run on a significant conservative agenda in national elections four times. They have won three of those elections by landslide margins. The American people are conservative. The media and the luke warm Republicans are wrong or lying.
• If I am the one who is wrong and Americans have become socialists, why would any conservative American want to live in the socialistic United States? It would be far better to dissolve the United States. Let the socialists have their country and we can have ours.
• If we secede, there are some who fear the socialists will attack us and try to return us to their slave society. I am through with the slave masters. I don't think they will have the nerve to attack us regardless of the numerical census or apparent military strengths between the respective seceded states. And which side do you think the military will take?
• The United States is going to change dramatically in the next two decades. It is either going to change our way and become the Constitutional Republic promised by the founders or it is going to disintegrate into a number or regional republics. The socialistic US that we now have is not financially viable much beyond the end of this decade. If the stock market crashes in the next few months, as seems very possible, then you might see five years of US viability under the present structure and socialistic agenda.
• Incrementalism is impossible. The time for it to work has run out and it has already failed.
• The United States is about to change dramatically. The changes are going to occur quickly; FreeRepublic may be able to exert major influence in how and in what direction.
• If FreeRepublic blindly votes for Republicans this fall and in 2004 without demanding a major shift in the Republican agenda (and there is no hidden conservative Bush agenda-Bush grew up in government and sees government as the solution to many of our problems-Bush does not see government as the enemy of the people), then it will not matter whether left leaning Republicans or the real socialists are elected. The results will be the same. There will be no major changes in policy or direction and the Unites States is doomed in less than twenty years.
• As the voice of the people, FreeRepublic can change the attitude of existing Republicans or replace existing Republicans with new real conservatives. If we do this successfully, there is an outside chance that we can save the Unites States and return it to the Constitution and its former glory. I agree that it will take the better part of a decade to rebuild America. But this is the part that Freepers need to understand, the decision to change and change dramatically must be made quickly. Medicare goes irrevocably into the red in 2008, well before the boomers start becoming eligible. The boomers will start retiring in late 2008. Social Security will go irrevocably into the red in 2012. By then it might be as much as five years too late to begin to make the changes before many Americans are going to become significant financial losers regardless of what changes are made. There will be no presidential election in 2016 because it is not financially possible to fund the unfunded liabilities of these socialistic programs in a politically possible way. There will be no United States in 2016 unless FreeRepublic forces the Republicans to turn back now.
• If FreeRepublic speaks with a single voice that tells the Republicans to accept the terms of the Contract with Congress or face the consequences, and the Republicans either reap the benefits or suffer the consequences, conservatives will have the full attention of all Republians (including Bush) and all conservatives in the 2004 election.
• If the Republicans fail to hear the message, then FreeRepublic and other conservative should try to achieve these goals through a third party effort.
• I believe that the third party route is much more difficult and can only be achieved by means of a powerful conservative candidate with immense stature, one like Rush Limbaugh. Ron Paul is a wonderful man with the right experience and credentials, but he lacks the name recognition and stature. Forbes has his family background and wealth standing in his way. And he was not the quick-witted, sure-of-himself candidate that was needed to get the nomination either time he tried. Keyes has a chance, but will have a taller hill to climb than Rush if he could be prevailed upon to carry the torch. Rush is a patriot and dearly loves freedom. When he is convinced that no one else is going to rise to the occassion and he realizes how critical the state of our nation has become, I think he will rise to the occassion. I think there needs to be another Ronald Reagan out there. At the moment, I only see Rush and I hope that he recognizes the seriousness of the situation before it becomes too little too late. Rush, if you are listening, I know that the major deterrent to your be willing to serve is the task of funding your campaign. There is a small chance that I am wrong about Excellence in Golf, but I am 95% confidant that my theory is correct. And if the theory is correct, I am absolutely certain that Excellence in Golf can completely fund your campaign out of your own pocket. If any Freeper has a direct line to Rush, do us all a favor and see that he takes a careful look at the Excellence in Golf website.

Conservative are going to get what they want regardless of how this plays out. But it may not be anything like what they expect. Either the country is conservative and returns to the Constitution or the United State is going to disintegrate and there will be one or more conservative nation/states that form republics modeled after what the United States was prior to 1913. One can happen relatively painlessly, even surprisingly pleasantly in only a few years with a decade long rebuilding program or the other will be delayed for as much as two decades and be excruciatingly painful for many Americans. And there will be an enormous destruction of wealth that will take generations to rebuild. Both can be free of bloodshed, but clearly both carry some risks of violence as well. We still have a strong people who are the finest on earth. It is our job to show them they have been led down the wrong path, and get them back on track before it is too late to turn back.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

He won't answer. He never does; they never do. Make their attacks and comments and run away. Wussies.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

I guess 984 is supposed to be an answer.

EV, you must be able to do better than that. And wasn't it you I saw a week or so ago, talking about how people should be more civil to one another around here? Embarrassed by the discussion on some thread? I'm a little surprised by your asterisk-laden language, in light of what I believe I remember you saying...or did I dream that?

[RedBloodedAmerican]

strawmen and misdirection?

What do you call ducking this after the things you have supported Klayman and keyes do?

And what do you call what Keyes and Klayman are doing by attacking the Conservatives?

[EternalVigilance]

Before the disruptor jumped in here, I was having a heated discussion with Arne about his plans to put pro-abortion candidates on the top of the GOP ticket, and to drive prolifers out of the GOP.

Do you agree with that agenda?

[ArneFufkin]

Bush has profound trust and support out in real world of fun, successful adults. I see it everywhere. He's in his 8th month at 75% approval ... our neighbors want him to be a President and Commander in Chief above partisan political slime right now. Bush needs that non-partisan professionalislm to warrant the moral authority to send our military personnel into war and death. He's doing his duty. The troglodytes here are the 1/10 of 1% on the wack edges of the political spectrum. In the continuum oval, they are so far at the right edge they're soul kissing with the environazis on the left edge.

[EternalVigilance]

Klayman is an ambulance chasing fraud.

Keyes is a statesman.

The fact that you can't tell the difference clearly shows your disconnect from reality.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

When Republicans run as mini-socialists, they lose elections.

Say, how'd Alan do last time around?

who won the last Presidential election?

Why do you think Jim posted this thread? You just answered it.

ROFLOL!! oh STOP! You guys are too much! Comedians, right?!

[TigersEye]

. My point stands.

Your point is abundantly clear. You are loyal to Party not principle. I am not. It's not about 'me,me,me' it's about right and wrong. Principle. If voting for W isn't support, if sending W money to help secure his win after the election isn't support then it isn't. I don't support any 'man' I support principle. This will fly right over your head as you are a man of compromise as you have repeatedly stated. So you go right on dancing on the graves of unborn children in the name of diversity and beating the Party drum with the bones of dead Isrealis in the name of compromise and sucking the meat out of taxpayers pockets in the name of practicality. Party on!

You won't be partying with my money because I quit working for half the wage my skills were worth when illegals who would took over the industry. If you can bring in Pro-abortion, Pro-palestinian, anti-2nd Ammendment, anti-1st Ammendment, Pro-welfare voters to swell the ranks of the GOP then go for it! If the party itself is more important than the prinicples it espouses then get on with your bad self!

When nothing is left of the Constitution but a revisionists wet-dream and it's illegal to criticise any politician or any PC policy I'll still be here. And I'll still stand on principle even if I do it from a prison cell or bleeding to death. I'm sure the likes of you will feel very self satisfied with that.

I won't be watering the Tree alone though you know. ; )

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Klayman is an ambulance chasing fraud. Keyes is a statesman. The fact that you can't tell the difference clearly shows your disconnect from reality.

This is your "reality"?

No wonder Liberals laugh at people who claim to be conservatives! I (and others on here) are convinced you guys are on here posing as Republicans/Conservatives in an effort to make us look ridiculous. It ain't gonna work. This thread is weeding them out, real nicely.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Ah, so you're joining the worst disruptor on FR in his little game of strawmen and misdirection?

Why?

I wouldn't identify RedBloodedAmerican as a "disruptor", or a "liberal". To tell you the truth, I'm a little baffled as to why you're slapping those labels on him. I know you have some disagreements with him (some of the same you have with me), but in terms of ideology, you're not that far apart. Neither are you and I - and I would be truly shocked if you called me a liberal.

And frankly, I think there are people who tend to side with you that could be labeled "disruptors". (I won't mention any names, but I think you could probably guess.)

If it's just so intolerable, there's always LP. Everyone seems to be in complete agreement over there: Bush is bad, Keyes is good, FreeRepublic has been taken over by "Bushbots" and now "sucks" - you know what I'm talking about, right?

[EternalVigilance]

I have a slow fuse maam, but there are certain things that do ignite it.

Liberals who despise prolife people, and want to make my party into the Liberal Party II, can do it.

The post you cite was in response to a gross insult.