Free Republic

Wow, the GOP just guaranteed Hillary’s victory in 08.

This man should be applauded, and held up as what he is, a Patriot, a man who is devoted to the security of the nation and not putting up with petty politics, or caving to some business or illegal aliens rights interest group. Congress and especially Congressional Republicans have failed US citizens today. When the next 9/11 happens, and when those responsible are found to have used "valid" drivers licenses to fly about the nation unheeded by security checks, or when they have overstayed their VISA with no consequences, or when they have falsely gained entry into this country and then carried out their attack killing countless Americans, you will be to blame. Their blood will be on your hands.

What kind of "conservatives" voted for this sham bill? Ones with their hand out that don't give a crap about security, thats who. Those who follow this non-conservative President as he spends his way to popularity, along with his unchecked spendthrift congress.

yeah I think I'll probably have to edit that one to add the body armor quote in.

I didn't hear anything last night that I hadn't heard 20 times before by speakers with 10 times better delivery.

nice to see the "roll call vote" accountability + + chickenshits.

nice to see the "roll call vote" accountability + + chickenshits.

what is this crap?

I'm glad someone sees the reality of the situation on these boards. Most people here have their heads in the sand or stuck up their own ass. Go look at teh PEW poll in which the most frequently used negative word to describe Bush is "liar," which did not come up in the May 2003 survey. The Dems are winning the media war, and the GOP is doing nothing about it. Sure its a part mixture of the dem primaries but lets look at how the President has responded:

The weakest SOTU address I have ever seen. It was sad and pathetic. Who gives a rats ass about mars, no one.

Meet The Press: way to go sport you blew that one as well.

People need to wake up and realize that the war on terror won't win this election mainly because the Bush admin has screwed it up case in point the WMD fiasco, nice job stovepipping intel dumbass and making the country look like fools to the world when nothing was found. You don't get elected being the "war president" (what a stupid thing to say) if the war is unpopular. Bush cant run on his ecnomic programs, or fiscal policies hes blown both of those. He can't run on any job growth or his penchant for blowing Mexico and Vincente Fox at every possible turn. I can't think of a legitimate reason to vote for the guy at this point, and I think that is going to resonate with a lot more people then most of the brainwashed idiots on these boards do. Maybe he can propose another 530 billion dollar entitlment program that lines the pockets of his friends and doesnt sway the AARP crowd anyway.

So you guys are going to vote for a DEMOCRAT president? At this point I think we already have a DEMOCRAT in office.

you don't think that would be a great rally point for conservatives? having the polar opposite of what we stand for beat the poor excuse for a conservative currently sitting in the white house would do wonders for the half-wits who seem to be propping up Bush. It would be a hard pill to swallow if Dean won, but it might just be the shock that a rather complacentand lackluster GOP needs in order to get its crap together.

Its really sad that we have to call into question Bush's fiscal record. He threw out tax cuts it appears as an apeasment option and then went to work spending like Ted Kennedy. Congress I might add is just as much to blame. Bill Frist is possibly the worst Senate majority leader in history. The guy could'nt buy a headline, let alone articulate a leadership stance, take a look at the judicial nominations debacle for "leadership" as far as the current crop of old men sitting on the hill.

We need new blood, we need conservative blood, we dont need someone who makes his legacy as one of total fiscal irresponcibility. As much a disarray as the Dems are today, the GOP isn't far behind when it comes to standing by its principles and pushing its agenda. Everyone on the hill seems just happy as a clam to piss away my money, and I'm tired of it.

Its one thing to be pragmatic (ie voting for Bush in 04) its another to be a lemming who seems unable to look at the issues at face value without some form of critical thought.

Just because you don't think govt size can't be reduced doesn't mean that those of us who feel that this is a pillar of conservative thought should abandon it.

Its only a "disneyland" idea because you don't have the moral fortitude to stand up to those who have taken over and demand that they live up to the promises they made when they ran for office.

Your position sums up mine as well. What ever happened to the contract with America? It seems to have died when the GOP sold Newt down the river.

This party needs conservative leadership, yet its missing. Bush came into his own post 9/11, but its time to stop using it as a crutch for unecessary spending.

Just read up on the massive pork coming out of washington at http://www.cagw.org amazing how many of these people have an R by their names yet have no problem fleecing the taxpayers in order to buy votes back home.

The problem I've always seen with the GOP is their inability to be consistant. For years during Clintons reign we bitched about this spending and that spending, rightfully so, but now so many here make excuses or ignore it all together and that makes you hypocrits. Intellecutal honesty is sadly missing from many on this board, as is a consitant application of standards and ideology. Remain ignorant and led by your party bosses becauase you are just as bad as the Dems when it comes to blind support for people who have long ago abandoned the principles that we elected them on.

I have no candidate, neither does any conservative if they are truly conservative in their ideology. I can respect Newt and disagree with his analysis. The govt has no business providing health insurance in the first place, nor education or any host of programs that it currently provides for. Ever extra dollar spent on some cradle to grave program takes this country one step closer to socialism.

And lets look at the alternative, do you really think Dean would ever have a chance at winning the general election? Nope not going to happen, not this election, not ever. Anger doesn't win elections no matter how much the fools at Moveon think it does.

Still, what are we left with? A "compasionate conservative". I don't want that I want a fiscal conservative, someone who wont allow gluttonous spending on programs that the govt has no business being invloved with.

Tax cuts without fiscal restraint are meaningless and have virtualy been removed by the massive addition to the defecit. At some point that money has to be paid back.

The govt is not the economy. GWB, for all his pluses when it comes to defense of the nation, has been an utter failure when it comes to fiscal matters. Stell tariffs, farm bills, NCLB, prescription drugs. This isn't LBJ or FDR in office, or is it?

Whose blaming America? Nice strawman sport.

Perhaps a basic level in civics is in order. Congress passes spending bills last time I checked, the President signs them. Having a GOP led congress, at odds with a Dem spending plan would produce a budget battle of sorts that would at least keep massive spending in check. Even Clinton vetoed spending bills. Look at the numbers and compare Bush to Clinton, the results should be obvious.

And to the point that the war on terror/iraq has been costly, thats one thing to consider, but its not the entire budget, and the massive increases in all things other then military spending should be taken into account. A 400 billino medicare entitlement (which will baloon over time to probablby 4 times that) isn't free either, and its fiscal impact is far more detrimental to the saftey of the nation then knocking off a two bit tyrant in the ME.

I supported the war in Iraq, and still do, but it is by no means the sole reason for the massive spending increases in this administration. The GOP has its hand in the cookie jar, and no one is telling them to pull it out.

Turn a blind eye all you like, what good does an R by your name do if you act like a D?

perhaps you could pull the blinders from your eyes and realize that this administration is far worse then any democrat one when it comes to pork spending and boosting spending on utter crap programs. I could bash on Bush for lots of things, his utter abandonment of anything remotely resembling a conservative agenda, his massive pandering to the elderly with yet another massive entitlement program, sucking up to Mexico by doing nothing to stop the massive influx of illegals into the country, and in fact doing the worst possible thing, giving them amnesty. Maybe his nice weak dollar policy will hurt the EU, but it hurts the US as well. I could go on and on. Theres little about this administration that rings true with real conservatives.

Of course, an ad-hom is what many here are best at, it shows how small minded and lame their arguments really are. Conservatives are supposed to make arguments based on facts, not emotion, sadly for a conservative message board, many here have thrown their lot in with the same emotional sniping that the DU crowd is known for.

Attacking me does nothing to disprove my argument, that Bush is not a fiscal conservative, and hes spending is unchecked and out of touch with whats best for the nation.

Lets face it, the Bush administration has abandoned anything close to fiscal conservatism. This and his stance on illegal immigration have all but forced my hand to not vote for him in the upcoming election. I'd rather Howard Dean (god forbid) take the White House if anything but to be tempered by a GOP congress that would refuse to pass his massive pork, unlike our current President who seems unwilling or unable to veto a spending bill.

The Rovians seem hell bent on pandering to Dem strongholds (latinos, blacks, and the blue hairs) and have all but abandoned its base when it comes to fiscal responsibility. I like tax cuts, but they are meaningless when you jack up spending to these levels, regardless of the war on terror, which I fully could understand an increase in military spending for, but so much of the last three budgets have just been pork. The GOP under that worthless spineless turd Frisk has basicaly started writing blank checks to pay off its backers. Sad to say, but fiscaly the country would be better off with a Dem in the White House if but to insure a check on the rampant spending.

For a quick look at spending: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/01/05/national1441EST0604.DTL&type=printable

How federal spending has grown during President Bush's first three years.

Figures are by federal budget years, which begin Oct. 1 of the previous calendar year. The first budget year Bush fully controlled was 2002, which began Oct. 1, 2001.

Data is from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, and the White House Office of Management and Budget.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Overall spending: 2001 (President Clinton's final budget year) $1.864 trillion; 2002 $2.011 trillion; 2003 $2.157 trillion; 2004 (estimate) $2.305 trillion. * Overall Bush spending increase, 2002 through 2004: $441 billion, or 23.7 percent.

* Last three-year period when overall spending growth was that fast: 1989 through 1991, 24.3 percent.

* Overall Clinton spending increase, 1994 through 2001: $454 billion, or 32.2 percent.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discretionary spending, the one-third of the budget that must be approved annually by the president and Congress.

Numbers are in budget authority, or new spending Congress and the president enact. Some of the money is for long-range projects like defense contracts and is spent over several years.

Numbers include midyear emergency bills enacted to finance wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and other costs, including $20 billion for 2001 provided under Bush. They also assume enactment of a measure combining seven 2004 spending bills into one, awaiting Senate approval.

* Overall discretionary spending: 2001 $664 billion; 2002 $735 billion; 2003 $846 billion; 2004 $873 billion.

* Overall discretionary spending increase under Bush, 2002 through 2004: $209 billion, or 10.5 percent annually.

* Overall discretionary spending increase under Clinton, 1994 through 2001: $141 billion, or 3.4 percent annually.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A Bush administration breakdown of discretionary spending. This uses a category the White House calls defense and homeland security, which includes the Pentagon, the Homeland Security Department, and other programs it considers homeland security. Numbers are in budget authority.

Defense/homeland security spending: 2001 $333 billion (includes $20 billion enacted under Bush in emergency bill after Sept. 11, 2001); 2002 $384 billion; 2003 $477 billion; 2004 $492 billion.

All other discretionary spending: 2001 $331 billion; 2002 $351 billion; 2003 $369 billion; 2004 $381 billion.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Spending for large benefit programs. Figures for 2004 are CBO estimates: Social Security: 2001 $429 billion; 2002 $448 billion; 2003 $467 billion, 2004 $491 billion.

Medicare: 2001 $238 billion; 2002 $256 billion; 2003 $277 billion; 2004 $288 billion.

Medicaid: 2001 $130 billion; 2002 $148 billion; 2003 $161 billion; 2004 $175 billion.

Now is this the legacy we want to pass on? One of utter fiscal irresponsibility. We all know once the govt gets its hands on money it never gives it back. Budgets never shrink, they grow. Perhaps the Bush clan has finaly figured this out with their little pander to spending responsibility in the coming budget (unlikley).

Tom needs to realize that this isn't 1966, and California has a whopping 35% registered Republicans. While I supported him and gave money to his campaign, its time for him to take one for the team and drop out of a race that he has zero chance of winning. Sometimes its best to swallow ones pride. If he stays in the race, it insures a Bustamecha win.