Skip to comments.Enough With The Neocon And Paleocon Carping—I'll Stand With George W. Bush In 2004
Posted on 12/10/2003 8:59:00 PM PST by BobbyK
click here to read article
What if I have almost two dozen plus issues on which I'm not going to vote for Bush over? Can I stay? ;-)
And I do have those reasons!
The first President Bush didn't give any of us any tax cuts, didn't go after Saddam ( instead, he listened to Powelll and the U.N. and some of our " allies " ), and though weak,he would never have sold out the USA ( or committed any other similar dirty deed, that the Clintons did!), so NO, you don't get even that.
You children won't be " paying " for the tax cuts. You stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the myriad good to great things that this President Bush has done. Your blinkers are tied on so tight, it's a complete wonder that you are able to see much of anything at all.
You are an UNAPEASEABLE , who prefers to complain, rather than to have even a few things you attest you want. Frankly, you want perfection and nothing else will do. Well, I've some news for you...you aren't going to get even 75% of what you imagine it is that you want from a president/government; not ever!
For some, the glass is always 1/2 full, for others, it's always 1/2 empty, for the UNAPPEASEABLES, there's NO GLASS! ;^)
You obviously do not understand, in anyway shape or form, the concept of tax rates on the taxable base.
According to the static thinkers like you, Wal-Mart should be bankrupt because for decades they've "rolled back prices". Are your children going to have to "pay for it" in higher toilet paper prices when they turn 25 because Wal-Mart sells you some Charmin 20% lower than last year?
Can you find at least three things, that President Bush has done, which you agree with ?
Do you even KNOW all of the things he's managed to do, or are you only aware of the things that you don't agree with him about ?
After answering those quetions, to yourself, then tell me why President Bush's re-election is not what you want and I'll decide if I ( and I don't run FR, so it matters not a whit. LOL ) think you should stay. :-)
Fortunately, for us, there are now Dems, who would rather vote for President Bush, than any Dem candidate. Isn't it amazing, that some Dems get it, but some supposed " Conservatives " don't ?
However, I'll be G-ddamned if I'll vote again for anyone, Mr. Bush included, who expands gov't shamelessly, entitlements, spending, ''education funding'' (what a tragic joke), all of the above and worse.
And who does NOTHING, not one thing, to protect our borders, to define the difference between citizenship and parisitism, and/or who refuses -- contrary to the oath of office -- to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
If the president, any president, utterly abandons his oath (never mind the Regress, who haven't had a clue about their respective oath of office for upwards of 30 years), there is no more Republic -- there only remains the doctrine of getwhatchacanwhileyacan, otherwise known as savagery.
If there is no longer recognised and admired either the responsibility of citizenship or the benefits accruing from legitimate citizenship, if the random filth from other nations, who have no intention whatever of even considering American ideals, never mind embracing them, need not even obey the laws of the United States in order to have the taxpayers subsidise them, if our protestations against the political class are to be time-limited according to the whim of those in office, as according to the Supreme Court ruling today...there is little point and enormous risk in continuing to believe that ''America'' is any longer a special nation, ''the last, best hope of mankind''.
And now, which course can we who believe in the Constitution take? Revolt, or leave. If there is a third choice, I cannot name it. Sit passively like sheep and wait for further confiscation of our rights and our property, the better for the politicians to buy votes from the parasites and the non-producers? That option is NOT for me.
Do as your conscience guides, and FReegards to all except the site pests, the one-worlders, and the assorted socialists here.
"When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn't like it. "Compromise" was a dirty word to them and they wouldn't face the fact that we couldn't get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don't get it all, some said, don't take anything.
"I'd learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: 'I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.'
"If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that's what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.
~~ Ronald Reagan, in his autobiography, An American Life .
One: Increase defense spending. But only 9/11 sent him down this road. Without 9/11, he was just as willing to keep overall defense spending down.
Two: He cut marginal tax rates on income, captial gains and the duplicate taxation of dividends. But, again, it's all temporary (most of this is the fault of Congress) and go back up in 2011. The usual mantra was, "don't worry, a future GOP Congress will make them permanent". Hmmm, wasn't that the same wimpy argument I heard about Bush signing campaign finance reform as I was wailing against him? They said, "there is no way the Supreme Court is going to affirm this law". HA!
Three: I'll have to get back to you...I'm drawing a blank.
Best of the season to ya!
Exactly....and the Necro-Conservative death N wish is still alive and well.