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

Skip to comments.

So you think George W. Bush is not a conservative?
SOTU transcript ^ | 1/22/04

Posted on 01/22/2004 7:07:09 AM PST by Wolfstar

ED. NOTE: On Tuesday evening, January 20, 2004, the President of the United States gave one of the most conservative State of the Union addresses in at least a generation. For a SOTU speech, it had a remarkably short spending wish list. Instead, it had passages such as those excerpted below — none of which would have been spoken by a Democrat or liberal (i.e., Leftist), or even a "RINO." Check it out:

[BEGIN EXCERPTS: Bold/underscore emphasis by Wolfstar]

Our greatest responsibility is the active defense of the American people. Twenty-eight months have passed since September 11th, 2001 — over two years without an attack on American soil. And it is tempting to believe that the danger is behind us. That hope is understandable, comforting — and false.

[SNIP]

The once all-powerful ruler of Iraq was found in a hole, and now sits in a prison cell. Of the top 55 officials of the former regime, we have captured or killed 45. Our forces are on the offensive, leading over 1,600 patrols a day and conducting an average of 180 raids a week. We are dealing with these thugs in Iraq, just as surely as we dealt with Saddam Hussein's evil regime.

Because of American leadership and resolve, the world is changing for the better. Last month, the leader of Libya voluntarily pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his regime's weapons of mass destruction programs, including a uranium enrichment project for nuclear weapons.

[SNIP]

Nine months of intense negotiations involving the United States and Great Britain succeeded with Libya, while 12 years of diplomacy with Iraq did not. And one reason is clear: For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible, and no one can now doubt the word of America.

Many of our troops are listening tonight. And I want you and your families to know: America is proud of you. And my administration, and this Congress, will give you the resources you need to fight and win the war on terror.

I know that some people question if America is really in a war at all. They view terrorism more as a crime, a problem to be solved mainly with law enforcement and indictments. After the World Trade Center was first attacked in 1993, some of the guilty were indicted and tried and convicted, and sent to prison. But the matter was not settled. The terrorists were still training and plotting in other nations, and drawing up more ambitious plans. After the chaos and carnage of September the 11th, it is not enough to serve our enemies with legal papers. The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.

[SNIP]

Some critics have said our duties in Iraq must be internationalized. This particular criticism is hard to explain to our partners in Britain, Australia, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, Italy, Spain, Poland, Denmark, Hungary, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Romania, the Netherlands — (applause) — Norway, El Salvador, and the 17 other countries that have committed troops to Iraq. As we debate at home, we must never ignore the vital contributions of our international partners, or dismiss their sacrifices.

From the beginning, America has sought international support for our operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and we have gained much support. There is a difference, however, between leading a coalition of many nations, and submitting to the objections of a few. America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country.

We also hear doubts that democracy is a realistic goal for the greater Middle East, where freedom is rare. Yet it is mistaken, and condescending, to assume that whole cultures and great religions are incompatible with liberty and self-government. I believe that God has planted in every human heart the desire to live in freedom. And even when that desire is crushed by tyranny for decades, it will rise again.

[SNIP]

In the last three years, adversity has also revealed the fundamental strengths of the American economy. We have come through recession, and terrorist attack, and corporate scandals, and the uncertainties of war. And because you acted to stimulate our economy with tax relief, this economy is strong, and growing stronger.

You have doubled the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000, reduced the marriage penalty, begun to phase out the death tax, reduced taxes on capital gains and stock dividends, cut taxes on small businesses, and you have lowered taxes for every American who pays income taxes.

Americans took those dollars and put them to work, driving this economy forward. The pace of economic growth in the third quarter of 2003 was the fastest in nearly 20 years; new home construction, the highest in almost 20 years; home ownership rates, the highest ever. Manufacturing activity is increasing. Inflation is low. Interest rates are low. Exports are growing. Productivity is high, and jobs are on the rise.

These numbers confirm that the American people are using their money far better than government would have — and you were right to return it.

[SNIP]

We're requiring higher standards [in schools]. We are regularly testing every child on the fundamentals. We are reporting results to parents, and making sure they have better options when schools are not performing.

[SNIP]

We must continue to pursue an aggressive, pro-growth economic agenda. Congress has some unfinished business on the issue of taxes. The tax reductions you passed are set to expire. Unless you act — (applause) — unless you act — unless you act, the unfair tax on marriage will go back up. Unless you act, millions of families will be charged $300 more in federal taxes for every child. Unless you act, small businesses will pay higher taxes. Unless you act, the death tax will eventually come back to life. Unless you act, Americans face a tax increase. What Congress has given, the Congress should not take away. For the sake of job growth, the tax cuts you passed should be permanent.

Our agenda for jobs and growth must help small business owners and employees with relief from needless federal regulation, and protect them from junk and frivolous lawsuits.

Consumers and businesses need reliable supplies of energy to make our economy run — so I urge you to pass legislation to modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy.

My administration is promoting free and fair trade to open up new markets for America's entrepreneurs and manufacturers and farmers — to create jobs for American workers. Younger workers should have the opportunity to build a nest egg by saving part of their Social Security taxes in a personal retirement account. We should make the Social Security system a source of ownership for the American people.

[SNIP]

In two weeks, I will send you a budget that funds the war, protects the homeland, and meets important domestic needs, while limiting the growth in discretionary spending to less than 4 percent. This will require that Congress focus on priorities, cut wasteful spending, and be wise with the people's money. By doing so, we can cut the deficit in half over the next five years.

Tonight, I also ask you to reform our immigration laws so they reflect our values and benefit our economy.

[SNIP]

I oppose amnesty, because it would encourage further illegal immigration, and unfairly reward those who break our laws. My temporary worker program will preserve the citizenship path for those who respect the law, while bringing millions of hardworking men and women out from the shadows of American life.

[ED. NOTE: The precedent for guest worker programs goes back at least to the Eisenhower administration.]

[SNIP]

In January of 2006, seniors can get prescription drug coverage under Medicare. For a monthly premium of about $35, most seniors who do not have that coverage today can expect to see their drug bills cut roughly in half. Under this reform, senior citizens will be able to keep their Medicare just as it is, or they can choose a Medicare plan that fits them best — just as you, as members of Congress, can choose an insurance plan that meets your needs. And starting this year, millions of Americans will be able to save money tax-free for their medical expenses in a health savings account.

[SNIP]

On the critical issue of health care, our goal is to ensure that Americans can choose and afford private health care coverage that best fits their individual needs.

[SNIP]

Small businesses should be able to band together and negotiate for lower insurance rates, so they can cover more workers with health insurance. I urge you to pass association health plans. I ask you to give lower-income Americans a refundable tax credit that would allow millions to buy their own basic health insurance.

[SNIP]

To protect the doctor-patient relationship, and keep good doctors doing good work, we must eliminate wasteful and frivolous medical lawsuits. And tonight I propose that individuals who buy catastrophic health care coverage, as part of our new health savings accounts, be allowed to deduct 100 percent of the premiums from their taxes.

A government-run health care system is the wrong prescription. By keeping costs under control, expanding access, and helping more Americans afford coverage, we will preserve the system of private medicine that makes America's health care the best in the world.

[SNIP]

One of the worst decisions our children can make is to gamble their lives and futures on drugs. Our government is helping parents confront this problem with aggressive education, treatment, and law enforcement. Drug use in high school has declined by 11 percent over the last two years. Four hundred thousand fewer young people are using illegal drugs than in the year 2001.

[SNIP]

A strong America must also value the institution of marriage. I believe we should respect individuals as we take a principled stand for one of the most fundamental, enduring institutions of our civilization. Congress has already taken a stand on this issue by passing the Defense of Marriage Act, signed in 1996 by President Clinton. That statute protects marriage under federal law as a union of a man and a woman, and declares that one state may not redefine marriage for other states.

Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people's voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.

[SNIP]

It's also important to strengthen our communities by unleashing the compassion of America's religious institutions. Religious charities of every creed are doing some of the most vital work in our country — mentoring children, feeding the hungry, taking the hand of the lonely. Yet government has often denied social service grants and contracts to these groups, just because they have a cross or a Star of David or a crescent on the wall. By executive order, I have opened billions of dollars in grant money to competition that includes faith-based charities. Tonight I ask you to codify this into law, so people of faith can know that the law will never discriminate against them again.

[SNIP]

The momentum of freedom in our world is unmistakable — and it is not carried forward by our power alone. We can trust in that greater power who guides the unfolding of the years. And in all that is to come, we can know that His purposes are just and true.

[END EXCERPTS]


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; bushamnesty; sotu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 2,001-2,015 next last
Last I checked, the title is President of the United States, not president of the Republicans, or Democrats, or conservatives, or liberals, or libertarians, etc. Even before Washington was elected our first president — in fact, during the debates as the Constitution was being written — the hallmark of the presidency was that it was to be the one national elective office that represented ALL the people and ALL the states.

A president has to call each issue like he sees it, all the while knowing that in a nation as vast as this, it is inevitable that at least a few million people will disagree with him on nearly every decision.

The intellectually honest, fair-minded among us will never expect to agree with any other human being — including a president — 100% of the time. Fair-minded people who claim to be (or to have been) suporters of a president will evaluate the totality of that president's record. In the case of George W. Bush, on a host of issues, this has been the most conservative president since Ronald Reagan. In some respects, more conservative.

1 posted on 01/22/2004 7:07:11 AM PST by Wolfstar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
You call bloating entitlement programs and big government, allowing the 1st to get trampled and rewarding illegal aliens conservative?

He has lost my vote, it's up to him to earn it back. So far he is failing miserably.
2 posted on 01/22/2004 7:11:46 AM PST by Bikers4Bush (Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar; MeekOneGOP; onyx; My2Cents; JohnHuang2; Dog Gone; Dog; isthisnickcool; OKSooner; VOA; ...
Thanks for posting this! This is GREAT!!!

To: Bush-Cheney '04 Ping List Members

Please keep this excellent article by Wolfstar handy so that you can defend the President when posters say that President Bush is not Conservative.

If you would like on or off this BC04 Ping List, please Freep mail me.

Thanks,

PKM
3 posted on 01/22/2004 7:12:06 AM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Support Bush-Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Thanks!
4 posted on 01/22/2004 7:12:57 AM PST by ConservativeMan55 (You...You sit down! You've had your say and now I'll have mine!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
I have one point I wish for you to consider, if you would be so kind. If a dem spent money they it has been spent in the past few years, if a dem sign the pill bill, if a dem affected our constitutional rights the way finance reform and the patriot act have (I am very skeptical of any attack on my rights for any reason.), if a dem proposed the amnesty, if a dem says that he sign an extention to the assault weapons ban, if a dem grew the size of government the way this President has we would all be howling mad and marching on Washington with torches.

I am not saying that GWB does not have many positives, he does but to me his negative now out weight them. If he, for example, would drop the amnesty and cut spending I would be happy to reevaluate him. I am not naive enough to think I can ever get all I want from a politicain in terms of his views, but now the issues he is for that I oppose are more to me then those I agree with him.
5 posted on 01/22/2004 7:14:06 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
He might have lost your vote, but I don't think I or anybody else really cares except some crack pot Buchaninites.

GEORGE BUSH IS AWESOME.

6 posted on 01/22/2004 7:14:24 AM PST by Porterville (Level 9 -Traitors against God, country, family, and benefactors lament their sins in this frigid pit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
"I oppose amnesty, because it would encourage further illegal immigration, and unfairly reward those who break our laws. My temporary worker program will preserve the citizenship path for those who respect the law, while bringing millions of hardworking men and women out from the shadows of American life."


As I and others have posted in other threads, let's look at the facts( http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,109026,00.html ):

"An amnesty is a general pardon granted by a government for a past offense. Crossing a U.S. border without a visa is a misdemeanor under federal law, and reentering the U.S. after a prior order of deportation is a felony. Under Bush’s proposal, these crimes will not be prosecuted, and that means it is an amnesty. But Bush goes on to offer the perpetrators visas and work permits, so it is not entirely accurate to call the Bush proposal an amnesty. It is an amnesty with an awards program."

His proposal contradicts what he is saying.
7 posted on 01/22/2004 7:15:09 AM PST by looscnnn ("Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils" Gen. John Stark 1809)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
He made "conservative" noises when he was campaigning last time around as well. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice....
8 posted on 01/22/2004 7:15:37 AM PST by steve50 ("There is Tranquility in Ignorance, but Servitude is its Partner.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
Well stated. After reading the liberal press for days about some of his programs, I was dismayed as they sounded like liberal give-away programs.

After listening to his speech, I was not surprised to find the press had it wrong, again.

There are a few matters we wish the president would address differently. But to think a Democrat would handle those matters better or more conservatively is to be living in a dreamworld.

To stay home and not vote is idiocy and I do hope those posters don't show up to complain after election day if a Rat is elected and does things that will place this country in a more precarious position.
9 posted on 01/22/2004 7:15:40 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Porterville
Keep thinking that way because as we all know he won last time by a landslide right?
10 posted on 01/22/2004 7:15:44 AM PST by Bikers4Bush (Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
How many times do you have to be told? It's not amnesty.
Amnesty means only instant citizenship and a free car to all illegals, issued on a Wednesday.
11 posted on 01/22/2004 7:16:18 AM PST by dagnabbit (Tell Bush where to put his Amnesty and Global Labor Pool for American Jobs- Vote Tancredo in Primary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RiflemanSharpe
Don't make sense, it just confuses them.
12 posted on 01/22/2004 7:17:21 AM PST by Bikers4Bush (Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dagnabbit
I sure hope you are being sarcastic.
13 posted on 01/22/2004 7:18:14 AM PST by looscnnn ("Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils" Gen. John Stark 1809)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
You can listen to what he says if you like. I'll pay attention to what he does.

L

14 posted on 01/22/2004 7:19:00 AM PST by Lurker (Don't p*** down my back and try to tell me it's raining.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
Well done! Thank you!
15 posted on 01/22/2004 7:19:03 AM PST by kayak (Have you prayed for our President and our troops today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dagnabbit
That's right, I forgot. Even if it strictly fits the definition of amnesty it's not because he says it isn't.

My mistake.
16 posted on 01/22/2004 7:19:40 AM PST by Bikers4Bush (Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Porterville
He might be conservative, but he is A HELL OF A LOT MORE COMPASSIONATE, than conservative. If a Dem spent money like he did you would be SCREEEEEEEEMING.
17 posted on 01/22/2004 7:20:22 AM PST by LandofLincoln ((the right has become the left))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush; RiflemanSharpe
You forgot to tell him that he is being a traitor, that he is going to vote for Dean, blah blah blah.
18 posted on 01/22/2004 7:20:34 AM PST by looscnnn ("Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils" Gen. John Stark 1809)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
Wolfstar: "this has been the most conservative president since Ronald Reagan. In some respects, more conservative."

Gee, Wolfstar, in precisely what respects has Bush been more conservative than Reagan?

19 posted on 01/22/2004 7:20:36 AM PST by mdefranc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
"We're requiring higher standards [in schools]. We are regularly testing every child on the fundamentals. We are reporting results to parents, and making sure they have better options when schools are not performing.

And where in the Constitution does it say that education is a Federal concern?

"Our agenda for jobs and growth must help small business owners and employees with relief from needless federal regulation, and protect them from junk and frivolous lawsuits.

Most of these lawsuits take place in state courts. The Federal government has no authority over the tort system of states.

"On the critical issue of health care, our goal is to ensure that Americans can choose and afford private health care coverage that best fits their individual needs.

The Constitution does not mention paying you doctor bills.

"One of the worst decisions our children can make is to gamble their lives and futures on drugs. Our government is helping parents confront this problem with aggressive education, treatment, and law enforcement. Drug use in high school has declined by 11 percent over the last two years. Four hundred thousand fewer young people are using illegal drugs than in the year 2001.

Not only is this not mentioned in the Constitution, but for the first 150 years of our Republic there were no laws against drug possession.

"That statute protects marriage under federal law as a union of a man and a woman, and declares that one state may not redefine marriage for other states.

This seems clearly contrary to clear statements in the Constitution. An amendment would probably be required.
20 posted on 01/22/2004 7:21:01 AM PST by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RiflemanSharpe
Read my tagline...no new liberal judges.
21 posted on 01/22/2004 7:21:21 AM PST by Keith (IT'S ALL ABOUT THE JUDGES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
So, what you are saying is that you wouldn't have voted for Ronald Reagan either?
22 posted on 01/22/2004 7:21:23 AM PST by carton253 (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States and war is what they got! (W))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: steve50
Actions speak far louder then words.
23 posted on 01/22/2004 7:21:27 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RiflemanSharpe
Caption This! Open up John!
24 posted on 01/22/2004 7:21:55 AM PST by ConservativeMan55 (You...You sit down! You've had your say and now I'll have mine!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: steve50; RiflemanSharpe; Bikers4Bush
"He made "conservative" noises when he was campaigning last time around as well. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...."


Yep. Something about not being a nation-builder and not increasing the size of government and being fiscally conservative. Like the 3 of you, he's lost my vote as well until he shows ANY sign of cutting back on his worse-than-Clinton domestic spending and kowtowing to illegal aliens.
25 posted on 01/22/2004 7:22:08 AM PST by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
Oh well, I tried.
26 posted on 01/22/2004 7:22:09 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
Caption This! Open up John!
27 posted on 01/22/2004 7:23:15 AM PST by ConservativeMan55 (You...You sit down! You've had your say and now I'll have mine!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
I will vote for George W. Bush, and support him as our president. He is a leader like Joshua, who says "Follow me, while I follow the Lord."

I do not think he is "Failing Miserably", but then I did not know that Dick Gephart had joined this forum.
28 posted on 01/22/2004 7:23:16 AM PST by Chief901
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
You call bloating entitlement programs and big government, allowing the 1st to get trampled and rewarding illegal aliens conservative?

Don't forget how his 'conservative' administration castrated the 4th amendment with the so-called 'Patriot Act'.

He has lost my vote

Mine, too. The Constitution Party gets my vote.

29 posted on 01/22/2004 7:23:50 AM PST by Pern ("It's good to know who hates you, and it's good to be hated by the right people." - Johnny Cash, RIP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mdefranc
He said SINCE Reagan. Technically he is correct, Bush has been more conservative than Clinton (not a lot) and more than his dad (on some issues).
30 posted on 01/22/2004 7:24:00 AM PST by looscnnn ("Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils" Gen. John Stark 1809)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
He earned mine back when he mentioned marriage, abstinance, and 600,000 prisoners being released that need help getting a life.
31 posted on 01/22/2004 7:25:05 AM PST by biblewonk (I must try to answer all bible questions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LandofLincoln
"If a Dem spent money like he did you would be SCREEEEEEEEMING."


total agreement. Many Repubs on this site fail/refuse to hold Bush to the ideals we held Clinton to. Ideals that he obviously failed to uphold.

But, in terms of spending like a Dem, Bush has already outspent Clinton domestically....and in only 3 years. One shudders to think of how much more he'll spend without considering a veto in the next 5 years. That is, if one allows themselves to critically examine the President's policies, rather than blindly following or ignoring all facts that indicate he's no conservative.
32 posted on 01/22/2004 7:25:25 AM PST by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Pern
The constitution party also now enjoys my patronage.
33 posted on 01/22/2004 7:25:26 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
Your only alternative is Kerry/Dean/Clark/Edwards.

Do you actually believe that you will get MORE CONSERVATIVE ACCOMPLISHMENTS with any of them??

You guys who threaten not to vote for Bush because he hasn't done enough for YOU need to start to think about the COUNTRY above your own egos!

34 posted on 01/22/2004 7:25:40 AM PST by ohioWfan (BUSH 2004 - Leadership, Integrity, Morality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RiflemanSharpe
you are right...actions which are important...Priscilla Owen, Miguel Estrada, Carolyn Kuhl, Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Pickering, William Pryor...

THESE are the important actions...actions which will have long-term effects decades after Bush has retired...long after Congress has passed or defeated any Bush spending initiatives.

Keep your eye on the prize...
35 posted on 01/22/2004 7:26:27 AM PST by Keith (IT'S ALL ABOUT THE JUDGES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RiflemanSharpe; Pern
Thanks for helping flush the country down the drain.
36 posted on 01/22/2004 7:26:40 AM PST by ohioWfan (BUSH 2004 - Leadership, Integrity, Morality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Chief901
I do not think he is "Failing Miserably", but then I did not know that Dick Gephart had joined this forum.

I think Dicky has joined many forums lately. I think that there maybe many patient disruptors running around trying to undermine this forum.... why not?? It works for Gramschi followers.

37 posted on 01/22/2004 7:26:57 AM PST by Porterville (Level 9 -Traitors against God, country, family, and benefactors lament their sins in this frigid pit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: LandofLincoln
If a Dem spent money like he did you would be SCREEEEEEEEMING.

That's because in addition to their spending, we include everything else we don't like about them....their whole socialist agenda.

38 posted on 01/22/2004 7:27:26 AM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
blindly following

ENOUGH SAID!

39 posted on 01/22/2004 7:27:34 AM PST by LandofLincoln ((the right has become the left))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
The intellectually honest, fair-minded among us...

Now look what you've done - you've excluded the (Anti)Constitution Party people at the beginning of your thread.

Fair-minded people who claim to be (or to have been) supporters of a president will evaluate the totality of that president's record

That requires a capability of a wider synthesis of thought and being able to grasps complexities of the real world. So now you've eliminated the one-dimensional, single issue only voters....and of course, the (Anti)Constitution Party folks.

40 posted on 01/22/2004 7:27:37 AM PST by Ophiucus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

Political pundits have a name for that kind of self-indulgent and self-absorbed action which makes one feeeeel good, but is ineffective and unproductive.

41 posted on 01/22/2004 7:27:41 AM PST by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; Ed_NYC; MonroeDNA; widgysoft; Springman; Timesink; dubyaismypresident; Grani; coug97; ...
a new temporary worker program to match willing foreign workers with willing employers when no Americans can be found to fill the job. This reform will be good for our economy because employers will find needed workers in an honest and orderly system. A temporary worker program will help protect our homeland, allowing Border Patrol and law enforcement to focus on true threats to our national security.

Or in English, let's give illegals jobs so that more of them can come it.

Feh.

Bush has lost the faith of a lot of people with crap like this.

No matter how you sugar coat it, the "guest worker" program is nothing short of amnesty, pure and simple.

We have to deal with illegals and the threat posed by the porous Mexican border. Giving illegals free access to jobs is not the way to do it, period.

Just damn.

If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...

42 posted on 01/22/2004 7:28:03 AM PST by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Keith
You are of course entitled to your opinion. I however do not seee judges as the overwelming issue. They are important but only one of many components to this policies. And sadly those policies I now find to be more negative then possitive. Even though he is positive on judges.
43 posted on 01/22/2004 7:28:48 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
BTTT

read later...





44 posted on 01/22/2004 7:29:18 AM PST by EdReform (Free Republic - Now more than ever! Thank you for your support!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
I received the entire SOTU address from Bush-Cheney 04, and I'm kind of sitting here in awe. I understand that some people say, "this is a hill I will die on", but some people wake up every morning saying "where's a hill I can die on?" When PatB left the Republican party, he immediately went to Ross Perot's old party and blew it apart. At some point in time you have to wonder whether it's better to have somebody throwing rocks at you inside your house or outside your house.

I don't think Bush has ever represented himself as anything other than what he is, and I voted for him twice for governor and I'm going to vote for him twice for President. On the amnesty thing, we've got people saying they won't vote for Bush over it, but if a Democrat gets in, their only complaint is that the plan doesn't go far enough. Protest votes are a flawed strategy.

BTW, to those who call me a Bushbot, I agree with him on more issues than I agree with you.

45 posted on 01/22/2004 7:29:51 AM PST by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
"If a Dem spent money like he did you would be SCREEEEEEEEMING."

A good portion of that spending is spent on security and the war effort.

46 posted on 01/22/2004 7:29:51 AM PST by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
I think the most serious problem to getting out a GOP vote this year will be overcoming Bush's support for his don't-call-it-amnesty policy. And the tremendous expansion in spending and the money squandered on the Department of Education and other liberal moneywasters. The SOTU threw a bone to the religious right on banning sodomite marriage but it won't be enough unless Bush really pushes for a constitutional amendment.

But it's the amnesty that will hurt the most in '04. The big-spending grousing will disappear as the economy recovers more.

I don't think any of these issues will make any great number of conservatives or religious righters switch to voting Dim, Libertarian, Constitution Pary, etc.

They'll just stay home. Like 3 million evangelicals did in 2000. Rove is still wailing about it and has no solution, it seems. I expect even more stay-at-homes this time around.

Bush did very well to recess-appoint Pickering. He needs to follow up with the other two appointments the Dims blocked as well. We were promised conservative Scalia-style judges in 2000. He needs to appoint the other two and do it now.
47 posted on 01/22/2004 7:30:16 AM PST by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdefranc
He signed the PBA ban, and has been more aggressively pro-Life than Reagan.

He will get us permanent tax cuts, which Reagan did not.

He is as, or more Conservative in supporting the military and on illegal immigration.

He has gotten accountability into school funding.

And both of them made compromises to reach the higher goal.

48 posted on 01/22/2004 7:30:32 AM PST by ohioWfan (BUSH 2004 - Leadership, Integrity, Morality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RiflemanSharpe
If you don't see judges as an overwhelming issue, you need glasses.
49 posted on 01/22/2004 7:31:17 AM PST by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
In the case of George W. Bush, on a host of issues, this has been the most conservative president since Ronald Reagan. In some respects, more conservative.

I don't see Parody in the Keyword List, so you intend to stand by this as serious? Please. Blackbird.

50 posted on 01/22/2004 7:31:31 AM PST by BlackbirdSST (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 2,001-2,015 next 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