Bush: A Democrat in Republican clothing?

Source: Washington Times ^ | 07/28/2002 | By Nicholas M. Horrock

[Lazamataz]

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.

[thepitts]

Is it that the President killed the International Criminal Court? Is it that he repealed Clinton's CO2 rules that were choking off electricity production in California and causing electricity rates to spike? Or maybe that he appointed, and backed, John Ashcroft and Ted Olsen, who just wrote to the Supreme Court that the 2nd Amendment is an indivisual right, not the "collective right" that liberals have maintained for decades? Or that he killed the Kyoto Treaty on Global Warming & backed and got our National Missile Defense program funded? I could go on and on. The point is that he didn't create the new Homeland Security Office just to create a bigger government. He realized, sadly, that in order to adequately protect the nations interests, in this case a bigger government is necessary. There is your difference between a democrat and a Republican on this issue. The rats create bigger govt. because they like it and it pleases them. Bush is doing it because he recognizes it as a necessity.Give him a Republican House and Senate and he can begin to cut much of the wasteful spending imposed by the rats.

What a load, dubya did not kill the ICC, and they did us no favors with the 2nd amendmant move.

Just who are you trying to convince, yourself?

[Jhoffa_]

I need to perk up, this whole looming election thing is depressing me. Everything hinges on the judiciary and November.

We don't get it and Daschle will continue the patented foot dragging routine all the way to 2004.

Think I will mosey on over to the RLC forum and get high.

[astudent]

For the long-term I believe that Bush will be proven wrong on several major issues:

Steel Import Tariff ---- Big mistake. Shows fear of confidence in free trade

Farm Bill --- Another Big Mistake. Too much money going to support non competition

Refusal to Acknowledge Questionable Business dealings ---Bush should have acknowledge that he received favoritism because of his name and heritage, but that what he did, though questionable, was legal. He should apologize to the American public and get on with things. Hiding, denying, misleading the American public about his questionable business dealings of the past is a mistake that will continue to haunt him

Inability to reduce --or make an effort to reduce government spending --- Thhis is a tragic mistake that likely will end up costing him the election as the government reduires more funds and the deficit grows.

Besides these areas, he has acted conservatively and in the best interests of the American people. Let's give him a B plus and hope that he will concentrate on correcting the above errors

[Lazamataz]

Ok Laz, it there a single democrat in the house or senate or governorship that you would prefer to Bush ? If you can not name one and I sure can't, then I fail to see how Bush is a democrat.

Senator and former Governor Zell Miller, GA.

There are a whole slew of Conservative Democrats in Texas and other points south that would totally out-conservative President Bush.

[Gelato]

This article implies that advocating tax spending alone qualifies a person as a Democrat. But it's not the spending, per se, that makes a person in favor of Big Government. It's what the money is spent on that counts.

Spending tax money on defense is a legitimate action of government. In fact, protection is what government was invented for in the first place! It's when that spending is used outside of this function, and is wasted on social programs and other pork, that it is to be criticized.

From the article:

Though Bush bristles at the notion that this is the very big government he ran against, the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 have forced him to major expansions from hiring 40,000 baggage screeners to increases in the Border Patrol, Coast Guard, Federal Emergency Management Agency and Immigration and Naturalization Service.

If this wasn't enough to give him membership in the tax and spend Democratic Club that conservatives all deplore, for the last 10 weeks Bush has been working on a major crackdown on the same big business that put up so much money to send him to Washington.

I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous. Spending money for baggage handlers is not socialism.

The only problem that needs to be resolved is, of course, that there's not enough money to go around--so if we want large increases in the defense budget, we'll need to offset that by rolling back spending on the non-essentials in the social programs started by the Democrats.

[Lazamataz]

What a job American presidents have, approximately 270 million critics and that is just in the homeland.

Yet everyone clamors for the position....

[cynicom]

Laz....

Go back and check the platform that FDR ran on for his first term. He toured the country in 1931 railing AGAINST BIG GOVERNMENT, OVER REGULATION, all on a conservative program. He won in a landslide with his platform, then see what we got.

[TLBSHOW]

apologize

For what should he do that for?

[Jhoffa_]

I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous. Spending money for baggage handlers is not socialism.

Unionizing them is.

Uncle Fed is now the largest union employer in the nation.

(And it's hard enough to fire a bad cop or teacher, can you imagine how tough it's going to be with screeners?)

[Lazamataz]

Quite a few people called Clinton the best president the Republicans could have had. Do you agree?

Heh. Actually, now that you mention it, without Clinton the great Rout of 1994 would not have happened, and Newt Gingrich would not have had his successful Contract with America.

But that aside, Clinton was an amoral self-centered narcisstic nihilist. When we voted for Bush we were de-electing sleaze, and therefore didn't look quite as closely at who we were voting FOR.

Therefore, Bush is now in office, veering too far to the left in too many areas for my comfort.

[Diverdogz]

Yes, Bush acts on principle ONLY WHEN and worse, EXCEPT WHEN it is politically expediant for him to do so.

It looks as if he is short term smart, long term stupid.

[cmsgop]

Think I will mosey on over to the RLC forum and get high.

Okay, but remember to pass the Dutchey On The Left Hand Side.......

[Jhoffa_]

You again?

You're the guy who googled Liz Cheney aren't ya?

(LOL!)

[Lazamataz]

Have you had a bad day?

I've had a bad two years.

I was promised a conservative President and all I got was this lousy t-shirt.

They say there are only 100 days to the election so don't get fooled by the rats smear of Bush.

Actually, I think we ignore this editorial at our own peril.

[admiralsn]

NO, you. With regards to the first point, see here With regards to the second, I disagree. I feel that it is a huge step in the right direction when any liberal issue is dealt a setback.

I guess you feel the rest of the points I made were unimportant as well.

[PGalt]

The President isn't getting serviced by an intern, multitudes of people aren't dying around him, enablers aren't going on tv lying for him, he isn't telling bold-faced lies while wagging his finger at us, he isn't using the military for deceptive purposes, the First Lady isn't taking over a large chunk of the nation's economy and his cabinet members aren't under indictment.

Life is good.

[FreeReign]

Steel Import Tariff ---- Big mistake. Shows fear of confidence in free trade

Free trade yes, except when it destroys our defenses. We must rely on no other sovereign country but ourselves to maintain such a vital industry. If the steel industry in the U.S. was in danger of closing down, then steel tariffs are a good thing.

[WhiteKnuckles]

But that aside, Clinton was an amoral self-centered narcisstic nihilist. When we voted for Bush we were de-electing sleaze

So how is Bush sleazy? Just because you don't agree with him 100% of the time he is a sleazy guy?

If you were elected president I'm sure you would take office with guns blazing.

BTW - I thought you were a Libertarian. WTF do you care about conservatives?

[PhiKapMom]

I thought you were banned!

[SamBees]

Is it me, or does it seem that no matter who is in office (lately), a certain agenda continues to be advanced????