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

To: backspace

Look, you can post whatever you like, but it won’t change what the medication addition to medicare was. If was socialist in nature. Bush and others knew what was taking place in the lending institutions in 2001 or 2002. What did he and his majority in Congress do about it? They allowed socialism to rule the day as loans were given out to poor people who couldn’t possibly make the payments. And when it comes to our borders and taxpayers having to foot the bill for other nation’s poor, isn’t that socialistic?

Folks have plenty of legitimate reasons to be pissed off at Bush. And I happen to be one of them.

He didn’t cause this current mess, but he sure allowed the things that did cause it to continue. And what’s worse, he allowed himself to be painted with the charge that it happened on his ‘Conservative’ watch, thereby tarnishing Conservatism across the board. Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton and Janet Reno are laughing their asses off at this one.

As I understand it, Fabian Socialism is the practice of creating a problem, so that you can step in and fix it, generally with massive Socialist fixes. Both parties contributed to this financial melt-down, and it’s a classic case of Fabian Socialism if there ever were one.

Bush had eight years as president of this nation, to bring his views into fruition. And this is what we are left with. What a disgrace...


168 posted on 12/14/2008 10:24:58 AM PST by DoughtyOne (I see that Kenya's favorite son has a new weekly Saturday morning radio show.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies ]


To: DoughtyOne

Nobody lives in a vacuum. Things didn’t go fat and hairy until 2006, when conservatives gave Democrats control of the House and Senate.


171 posted on 12/14/2008 10:40:16 AM PST by cake_crumb (Waiting for Dear Leader Obama to drop sea levels and heal Earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

DoughtyOne, I can’t speak to the medicare issue - I didn’t follow it. “Socialist in nature” is still not socialist. Maybe a better term would be welfare, charity or “give-aways”. Even then, I find it difficult to put the whole thing at the president’s feet. People often attribute too much power or blame to the president in regards to economic policy. Bush and other republicans were smacked down when they tried to initiate reform of FEDDIE and FANNY. What else was he supposed to do?

I’m not a political purist. I never expected President Bush to do be a perfect conservative.

It’s easy to criticize but we don’t know the details, the back-story, the true circumstances surrounding a leader’s decisions.


175 posted on 12/14/2008 10:58:48 AM PST by backspace (Please don't laugh at my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | 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