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

To: Fledermaus
You have to face reality. Your choice is NOT between some ideal conservative, who doesn't even exist, vs. Bush.

Your choice is between Bush, who is keeping us safe vs. Dems would would sell us out to terrorists and terrorist nations, by undercutting our defenses.

Not to mention, ask yourself where do the Dems stand on the issues you are criticizing Bush about?

Will you be happier and better off under Dean or Kerry or Hillary, than you are with Bush as President?
45 posted on 12/10/2003 10:19:38 PM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: FairOpinion
Not to mention, ask yourself where do the Dems stand on the issues you are criticizing Bush about?

Will you be happier and better off under Dean or Kerry or Hillary, than you are with Bush as President

In answer to this question,yes, for having this would allow the pleasure of unspeakable misery to cause goosebumps for the Principled martyrs .
61 posted on 12/10/2003 10:34:39 PM PST by gatorbait (Yesterday, today and tomorrow......The United States Army)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

To: FairOpinion
I trust Lieberman on defense. But I'm not going to let others dictate to me what I should worry about.

Are Islamist going to be roaming the streets killing and maiming at will? No. And no President will allow it regardless of who they are. Besides, I can defend myself quite well and live in a remote enough area and have land in even more remote areas.

Maybe I'm a cynic, but why would life be worth living if the national debt skyrockets to unattainable levels and the dollar collapses? (which is why I hedge with gold)

Why is being "free" worth having my political speech curtailed? Or I'm taxed to death to pay for the healthcare of well to do and rich seniors? Or I'm drained of my money that gets thrown down the rathole of bureaucracies that are NEVER held accountable by ANY President or administration like federal education spending?

Then there are all those wonderful regulations that make us all lawbreakers on a daily basis. And the fact they tell me what and how much to eat, how much water can flush down my toilet at one time, what kind of car I can drive with their ridiculous CAFE laws, how long I have to stand in line at the airport because they are too politically correct and won't just watch the young Arabs with no luggage going one-way on a cash purchased ticket?

And on, and on, and on, and on. Exactly what is worth being "safe" when my life is micromanaged by pinheads who think they know better than anyone else? I guess our definition of safety and security and freedom just differ.

Also, in 1991, after living in Arkansas from 1970-1983, I made all of your arguments to anyone that would listen about Clinton over Bush 41. Now, I'm not saying Clinton was a good president (he wasn't) but he didn't "destroy" the economy as I predicted back then. He didn't shove far left wing liberalism down our throats (thanks to Hillarycare and 1994), etc. that I predicted.

He did have sex in the Oval Office. I predicted that! I knew his behaviour and knew there was no way he wasn't going to take advantage of the most powerful office in the land when he relished it as governor of Arkansas.

And just like 1991, everyone on the "right" is saying "Dean can't win". If I had a nickel for everytime I heard "Clinton can't win", I'd be richer than I am. And the only factor Perot brought to the situation was that he was more to right economically than Bush 41 and that shows the weakness of Bush, not Perot.
73 posted on 12/10/2003 10:42:03 PM PST by Fledermaus (Fascists, Totalitarians, Baathists, Communists, Socialists, Democrats - what's the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

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