Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush: A Democrat in Republican clothing?
Source: Washington Times ^ | 07/28/2002 | By Nicholas M. Horrock

Posted on 07/28/2002 6:24:02 PM PDT by Lazamataz

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:55:59 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

WASHINGTON, July 28 (UPI) -- When President Franklin Roosevelt, a member of one of the most wealthy and prominent families in America, was constructing the New Deal, which brought forth the Securities and Exchange Commission, strong banking regulation and labor protections, he was excoriated as a traitor to his class. Even one his own family members wrote him to complain.


(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-195 last
To: Texasforever
A limited government conservative. Trouble is, don't seem to be any out there.
181 posted on 07/29/2002 5:23:29 PM PDT by Jesse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
Thanks for pointing this out.

I still believe that he has allowed many bills to pass that should have had the pork removed. also, his rhetoric does not seem to indicate the need for frugality --- and the Congress has never been frugal.
182 posted on 07/29/2002 7:15:48 PM PDT by astudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
I don't believe that the tariff actions on steel by Bush had primarily to do with defense. I think they had to do with re-election. If I am right, then Bush was wrong.
183 posted on 07/29/2002 7:17:38 PM PDT by astudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Diverdogz
Good Point.

I believe I agree with you --- unfortunately
184 posted on 07/29/2002 7:19:15 PM PDT by astudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: WhiteKnuckles

I didn't say he was sleazy.. My issues don't revolve around his personal integrity and in fact I defend him on this point.

Laz didn't call him "sleazy" either.

What was said (several times now) was that:

Meaning, in simple term that Clinton WS sleazy and by electing Bush we threw the sleaze OUT.

185 posted on 07/29/2002 9:13:45 PM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
PS: I didn't intentionally post #185..

My computer has some sort of cache problem ..

As I posted this previously.. Word for word and I have posted much since..

It's like a cyber vomit to see it in my self search,

186 posted on 07/29/2002 9:16:58 PM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
In regards to post #133,...

Many do not realize that those rent-a-cops were IN FACT government employees prior to 911.

You are factually incorrect here. If they were already government employees, there would have been no need to nationalize the entire airport security industry. The government regulated the industry prior to nationalizing it, but those employees were not, in fact government employees. Are you saying that because airports are owned by various municipal governments, that everyone employed there is a government employee?

Does that include those who work in the airport at TGI Fridays and other resturaunts? Does it include the folks who ticket your baggage?

I think not.

Prior to 911, the security companies were sub-contracted for security services. Does this subcontracted status make them government employees? I'm sure a lot of people at Boeing would be interested in learning that as well.

187 posted on 07/29/2002 9:52:57 PM PDT by zeugma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
You are factually incorrect here. If they were already government employees, there would have been no need to nationalize the entire airport security industry

No I am not factually incorrect. All Airports are under the City, County and State Government in which they are located. The rent-a-cops' agency is paid through the Airport management.

188 posted on 07/29/2002 10:00:11 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
My attempted point, was that being an enemy of the Democrats, does not make a person a Conservative. Party affiliation is all it takes to garner negative attention from the Rat party.
189 posted on 07/29/2002 10:05:14 PM PDT by jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
No I am not factually incorrect. All Airports are under the City, County and State Government in which they are located. The rent-a-cops' agency is paid through the Airport management.

I see. I wasn't aware that sub-contractors are automatically considered federal employees./sarcasm

Even if you considered the rent'ocops municipal employees, which is a hell of a stretch, it still doesn't make more sense to take away the local control of 'policing' the airports. I thought having a massive federal bureaucracy micromanaging the details of local airlines is a concept more welcome to democrats. Good to know that it's o.k. as long as the statist signing the executive orders and laws has an "R" by his name.

190 posted on 07/30/2002 6:59:34 PM PDT by zeugma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
Even if you considered the rent'ocops municipal employees, which is a hell of a stretch, it still doesn't make more sense to take away the local control of 'policing' the airports

Yep that "local" control really did a bang-up job didn't it? Dripping sarcasm

191 posted on 07/30/2002 7:01:25 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
About as bang up a job as the feds did in keeping tabs on the terrorists in the first place.

You may not have a problem with the ever-expanding government, but I do.

192 posted on 07/31/2002 10:17:08 PM PDT by zeugma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Therefore, Bush is now in office, veering too far to the left in too many areas for my comfort.
193 posted on 08/02/2002 1:42:12 PM PDT by SamBees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Bttt
194 posted on 01/07/2003 3:02:28 PM PST by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Inspector Harry Callahan
Washington's $782 Billion Spending Spree
195 posted on 01/28/2003 8:01:34 AM PST by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-195 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson