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

Skip to comments.

Rumbling on the Hard-Right
The Washington Times ^ | December 30, 2003 | Stephen Dinan

Posted on 12/30/2003 11:44:49 AM PST by GunsareOK

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:41:02 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

President Bush is beginning to anger certain hard-line conservatives, particularly over fiscal issues, the way his father did in the year before he lost to Bill Clinton in 1992.

It's not clear how deep the dissatisfaction goes, and whether it will translate to damage at the polls in November.


(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; 2004elections; bush; conservativevote; cutnosespiteface; electionpresident; gwb2004; twopercenters; votegfordean; wastedvotes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 501-535 next last
To: Texas_Dawg
>I'm sorry, but your parents just aren't conservatives

It doesn't matter
what you call people. Voters
are just plain voters

and many of us
see alarming numbers of
voters who voted

for Bush the last time
have bought the media's hype
on this go around.

101 posted on 12/30/2003 12:29:40 PM PST by theFIRMbss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
Cool chart.
102 posted on 12/30/2003 12:30:02 PM PST by Taliesan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
I don't know... maybe you're just not very intelligent. Who knows? Must be something like that though.

Very persuasive ad hominem you just hurled, there. :|

Let me try this again: Yes I'm voting for Bush. But no, he's not a conservative in any fiscal sense. The enormous explosion in size of government under him can only fractionally be attributed to war and homeland defense spending. Pure entitlement spending - the stuff we ought to be cutting - is exploding too: No excuse for that.

I'm smart enough to see that for what it is: pure pandering. If it keeps Dean out of office, is it worth it? Maybe. But we need fiscal conservatism now more than ever, and I have no confidence - or any reason to be confident - that Bush will supply leadership there, as he has in the war on terror.

103 posted on 12/30/2003 12:30:03 PM PST by Publius Maximus (Compassionate Conservatism: Profligate Liberal Spending With A Conservative Rhetorical Twist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
I seriously hit my knees and thank God every night that we have a President that does not go out of his way to make people like you happy.

As far as I can tell, he seems to go out of his way and make all of the Big Governement socialists happy...ya thank god for Bush and 'True Conservatives'...

When you find enough time to climb off your high horse, and suck some thicker air down here on the ground with us simpletons...please explain to all of us what a 'True Conservative' is.

After all you seem to throw the phrase around like a hollywood has been at a cocktail party drops names.

If he does not let the AWB sunset, and make it perfectly clear that he will veto any re-introduction...he can kiss my butt.

Now don't tell me how 'True Conservatives' will blindy follow this man, and imply I am other than Conservative.

I doubt you jumped in your car and drove 1500 miles to Texas in 2000 and volunteer for, and get shipped to, Florida as a back up vote counter, nor do I doubt you dug deep into the kitty to pony up multiple large for the legal defense fund for the recount challenges.

If Bush caves on AWB, screw him.

104 posted on 12/30/2003 12:30:44 PM PST by antaresequity (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Once harm has been done, even a fool understands it.

Homer (800 BC - 700 BC), The Iliad

If YOU were truly a conservative you'd have a clue.

105 posted on 12/30/2003 12:31:12 PM PST by Zipporah (Write in Tancredo 2004 ! Both in the primary and general election!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
You're correct....the REAL conservatives do need a bit of tissue paper. The republican party is nothing more than a pile of **** these days. It's time to clean up.
106 posted on 12/30/2003 12:31:31 PM PST by politicalwit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GunsareOK
If one is going to vote for Bush or not, they first must consider what the second Bush term might bring. Obviously, Bush is not going to move on amnesty for illegal immigrants before the 2004 election. But my guess is that if reelected Bush will push for legislation that will open the door even wider to immigration. And if the congress stays Republican, they will give Bush what he wants. If a Democrat is elected and the congress stays Republican, there is a slightly better chance that the Republicans would oppose such legislation on political grounds. For a conservative sometimes divided government is better than one party holding all the power. The founding fathers designed our government with three branches so that there could be checks and balances. The checks and balances for the voter sometimes is insuring another set of checks and balances by dividing the executive and legislative between two parties. Legislative gridlock might have been preferrable to the legislative efforts of the Hastert House, the Frist Senate, and the Bush White House which have not been impressive. As a conservative I would like to see secure borders, less Federal money spent on education, restrained spending on pork barrel projects, all of which have not been present in the last four years. That said, if I vote for President, I would vote for Bush. But sometimes you go to the polls to exercise your voting rights, and you come to an office that you just cannot pull the lever on.
107 posted on 12/30/2003 12:32:30 PM PST by Biblebelter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs
RinaseaofDs writes:
If the democrats had a credible guy on their side, a Sam Nunn hawk with decent fiscal sense, Bush would have a problem.

Actually, the Democrats _do_ have such a guy, who might be considerably more conservative than G.W. Bush. Unfortunately, he's not running. I could even consider voting for him (and I have sworn NEVER to vote for a Democrat again).

His name is Zell Miller.

Cheers!
- John

108 posted on 12/30/2003 12:32:46 PM PST by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
"but we don't drink enough "koolaid" to vote for someone else which will ASSURE we have a LIBERAL in office. "

Bush IS a liberal.

And just wait until Bush is a lame duck, and REALLY starts working on his "compassionate conservative" legacy. Just wait.

'Compassionate conserv' was a term to con conservatives into believing he planned on being conservative. Some of us are not buying this time around.

Bush is conservative on religious and moral issues... and uses both as a smokescreen for his agenda.
109 posted on 12/30/2003 12:32:47 PM PST by At _War_With_Liberals
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Wild Irish Rogue
Again-where is the link to any official announcement of a Bush plan to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants ??

He hasn't. As a matter of fact, didn't he say around a month ago that amnesty was not an option? I, too, am an illegals alarmist, but I also look at what *hasn't* happened so far. For the past three years, the same 'the sky is falling' scenario has been floating around. But will trust that the President will do what is right for America. Maybe that trust will have be misplaced. And I will deal with that if and when the time comes. In the meantime, I continue to fire off emails left and right about no amnesty.

110 posted on 12/30/2003 12:33:21 PM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
There is a reason why every conservative think tank are alarmed at the growth of government under his watch. But hey spin the party line. Not to mention he signed on to CFR

You belong to the camp that are

Republican first
Conservative 2nd

I will vote for the man, but the man is no conservative.

111 posted on 12/30/2003 12:33:27 PM PST by luckydevi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
define conservatism

As far as the Presidency goes (since that is what we are talking about), it is someone who seeks to keep America safe, strong militarily, open to business and capitalism, reduces taxes, appoints conservative, constructionist judges, promotes a healthier environment for traditional Western religious practice, and, most importantly, seeks to do whatever is necessary to keep the White House from the Left, even if it means giving ground with an electorate that is 50/50 right now.

112 posted on 12/30/2003 12:34:06 PM PST by Texas_Dawg (Waging war against the American "worker".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
Bush will appoint no SC judges in the next 5 years. Not one activist judge, by nature, will step down and allow a conservative justice to be appointed. Not a possibility.

There are other reasons that SC judges step down. Could be health, etc. Even so, are you willing to take the chance that a conservative judge steps down, for one reason or another, with another "Clinton" in office?

113 posted on 12/30/2003 12:34:32 PM PST by !1776!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Just don't kid yourself into thinking you're a conservative or that you represent a large percentage of people

OK, Georgie. Whatever you say.

Me, personally, at this point, I really don't care if Dean wins. I'll just leave the country again anyway. I'm going to start following your philosophy. Get mine and to he** with everybody else.

Soon, I'll be as conservative as you.

114 posted on 12/30/2003 12:35:11 PM PST by riri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: GunsareOK
"I'm hearing a lot of anger," says Richard Viguerie, the guru of conservative political direct mail. "I'm beginning, for the first time, [to hear] people talk about 'it would not be the worst thing in the world if Howard Dean were president,'

I, for one, cannot imagine this passing the lips of a conservative. Not voting for W, yes; this, no.

115 posted on 12/30/2003 12:35:55 PM PST by CaptRon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
Yes, the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....the SKY IS FALLING....
116 posted on 12/30/2003 12:36:49 PM PST by goodnesswins (On the SIXTH Day of CHRISTMAS........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Come on, T_D! Tell us what a wonderful "conservative" the president is when it comes to 'gun control.' Seems like 'Dubyah' declared that he would sign a renewal of the Clinton/Feinstein 'assault weapons' ban if it were offered to him. Of course, he may not get the chance - if the Republicans in Congress have any balls ( a debatable notion ;>). Or he could (properly, for a REAL "conservative" ;>) change his mind.

Ante up, T_D: tell me (and the other NRA 'lifers' here ;>) what a great "conservative" GWB is on the 'gun control' issue. While you're at it, consider this: about 19% of the voters contributing to the '94 Republican 'revolution' were gun owners. In other words, in '94 one out of every five actual voters was a gun owner voting Republican - and 'Dubyah' has announced that he is prepared to piss on their constitutional rights...

;>)

117 posted on 12/30/2003 12:37:38 PM PST by Who is John Galt? ("COME AND TAKE IT!" - Battle of Gonzales, Texas Revolution, 1835)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyZ
"I think Bush is awesome.."

That is what we called rock bands we liked in the 80's. Congratulations.
118 posted on 12/30/2003 12:37:58 PM PST by At _War_With_Liberals
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
I am not a "one issue" conservative and the MOST important issue on the table is who is going to protect America from terrorism and their ilk...NOT Dean, Not any democrat. I happen to be benefitting from the lower tax code that Bush pushed through, I spent my $800 child tax credit which came in very nicely when we needed extra, and, as a Christian I prayed for a strong leader who would lead America with strong Christian morals. No President is ever going to make all the right decisions, nor will he ever completely satisfy his voting base, but President Bush has done a very worthy job in one of the most difficult times in the history of this nation and frankly we NEED his calm leadership for a few years more.
119 posted on 12/30/2003 12:39:02 PM PST by princess leah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
So according to you, we should keep electing socialists, because that is really good for the Republican party.

Ahem. Let me try this again.

Maybe you missed the part where you said I'm holding my nose and voting for him. Anyway.

Truthfully, when it comes to big spending liberalism, Bush has a serious case to make that he's a bigger socialist than Clinton was. Getting elected is great, and Lord knows Bush has got that formula down, to the Democrat's chagrin. But when it comes to the budget, he is NOT doing what's in the best interest of the country - he's doing what's in the best interest of his re-election campaign. He's completely sold fiscal conservatism down the river in exchange for a majority status that now depends upon dispensing federal largesse to anybody who thinks their entitled to it.

This is not a fanciful charge. Look at the budget numbers and tell me, if the name were Clinton with this kind of fiscal record, that you wouldn't be raising unholy hell about what an uncontrollable spender he is. Be honest.

Yes, Bush is The Man for the war on terror, but its gonna cost us A LOT more than it has to because he simply doesn't take fiscal restraint seriously. The re-election Gravy Train is simply too tempting.

120 posted on 12/30/2003 12:39:09 PM PST by Publius Maximus (Compassionate Conservatism: Profligate Liberal Spending With A Conservative Rhetorical Twist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
The growth of government is a threat to capitalism and liberty.

Being anti-left doesn't make one a conservative.
121 posted on 12/30/2003 12:39:51 PM PST by luckydevi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: antaresequity
If Bush caves on AWB, screw him.

So you are willing to give up even more ground on Second Amendment Rights under a different Administration?

You do know that Congress has to pass the AWB before it goes to the President for signature don't you? Why should they get a pass on doing their job (since they are your most direct representatives in government)?

One issue wonder - where will RKBA be under Dean?

122 posted on 12/30/2003 12:40:52 PM PST by !1776!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: GunsareOK
Who would you vote for if Dean or Nader were the alternatives? Or would you just stay home and do nothing?
123 posted on 12/30/2003 12:41:24 PM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theFIRMbss
It doesn't matter what you call people. Voters are just plain voters

OK. That's fine. But I was just letting you know they aren't exactly conservative then (for what it's worth). Everyone has their own unique situations and peer groups but the most historically reliable polls show Bush is doing very well. We have a long way to go, but if you believe the economy and Iraq will continue to improve, coupled with some less-noted major demographics changes happening in this country right now (the boom in evangelical Christianity, the increasingly conservative shift in the Hispanic crowds as they become wealthier and more integrated into America, etc.), then you will believe, like I have been saying since back in the "darkest" days of Summer '03 (Niger uranium fiasco, WMDs questions, weak stock market, rising unemployment, beginning of the Iraqi "resistance", etc)... that GWB will win in a landslide. And he will.

124 posted on 12/30/2003 12:42:11 PM PST by Texas_Dawg (Waging war against the American "worker".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: GunsareOK
He shant receive my vote either.

I supported him hoping he'd defend us against the illegal alien invasion. He has not. In fact he seeks to grant AMNESTY.

I supported him because I thought he had a respect for the Constitution and the rule of LAW, especially after the post-election madness. His signature upon the Patriot Act and it's follow-up tell me otherwise.

I supported him trusting he'd protect the American economy and jobs. Instead he bends towards globalism, "free markets" with unfree nations which siphon off our jobs and businesses.

I supported him with the knowledge that's he'd truly prosecute a war on terror and spare no enemy or their ally from our sword. But his lack of action towards the oil sheiks and chief terror sponsors of Saudi Arabia shows me the truth.

I supported him assured that he'd be a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment, the one which protects all others. But instead he signals willingness to sign a reauthorized "Assault Weapons" Ban.

And I supported him thinking that, least of all, he'd adhere to the most very basic of Republican tenets: small government and reduced spending. And what have we? A spender and propagator of government the likes of which would make FDR proud.

No, he won't be getting my vote.

125 posted on 12/30/2003 12:42:42 PM PST by StoneColdGOP (McClintock - In Your Heart, You Know He's Right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
It has been said that 'those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.' The first President Bush assumed that gun owners would support him, even if he actively promoted 'gun control.' The first President Bush was proven wrong. Let's see whether the second President Bush learns from history...

;>)

126 posted on 12/30/2003 12:44:17 PM PST by Who is John Galt? ("COME AND TAKE IT!" - Battle of Gonzales, Texas Revolution, 1835)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: rintense
Furthermore, Bush is going to leave the GOP much stronger and it will make it easier to solve other problems in a manner that will be much easier. There is something to be said for his approach as well.

He's put a much better face on conservatism that we've had since Ronald Reagan. And he'll be as well-loved. That's going to pay dividends down the road as well.
127 posted on 12/30/2003 12:44:24 PM PST by hchutch ("I don't see what the big deal is, I really don't." - Major Vic Deakins, USAF (ret.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
"Your FR handle is hilariously ironic."

If you check my posting record since July, you will see that this statement is absurd.

I have read your GOP-bot posts since July.

You are a GOP-bot because this admin is a godsend for your personal wealth. Every position you take has this at its root. If you want to be an ideological slave to wealth, and screw the future generations of this nation, that is your call.

But count me out.
128 posted on 12/30/2003 12:45:18 PM PST by At _War_With_Liberals
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Publius Maximus
Yes I'm voting for Bush. But no, he's not a conservative in any fiscal sense.

Absolutely false: Taxes. He cut them.

Maybe you think taxes will just go up in the future (yeah 'cause THAT's real popular and easy politically), but low taxes are a restraint on government spending and frame the debate as: higher taxes or lower spending?, a PR choice which we win; lowering the tax rate has already won future budget battles for conservatives to an extent you obviously do not comprehend.

So you should like Bush even more than you do.

129 posted on 12/30/2003 12:45:25 PM PST by JohnnyZ (Abolish the food tax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Zipporah
If YOU were truly a conservative you'd have a clue.

I'm as conservative as can be. So is GWB. 4 more years of this and he will go down as one of the most succesful and conservative Presidents we have ever had. Reagan was possibly more conservative, but other than that, GWB is one of the most conservative Presidents we've ever had. Only the FRinge right, angry, socialist misanthropes are unhappy with him. But they are statistically insignificant and need to be routed out of the GOP anyway.

130 posted on 12/30/2003 12:45:36 PM PST by Texas_Dawg (Waging war against the American "worker".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
As far as the Presidency goes

I have been looking for those words for a while. Congress shall make no law...

If people would start to understand that we have a President, not a king, and that laws originate with the Congress, maybe they could figure out how to win the war they are willing to sell out for a battle.

131 posted on 12/30/2003 12:45:57 PM PST by !1776!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: GunsareOK
Come an' git me...I'm not voting for him either, and they don't get much more hard line than me.
132 posted on 12/30/2003 12:46:55 PM PST by ModernDayCato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fishrrman
Why wait? He should announce it before the election. Plenty of votes to be had.
133 posted on 12/30/2003 12:47:20 PM PST by hawk1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Who is John Galt?
YES.....I agree....I HOPE he has learned....and I also am watching to see what he does with a number of issues, but I'll be damned if I'll THROW away MY VOTE because he isn't a perfect conservative.
134 posted on 12/30/2003 12:47:41 PM PST by goodnesswins (On the SIXTH Day of CHRISTMAS........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Jeez, who died and made you the Namer of All True Conservatives?
135 posted on 12/30/2003 12:48:23 PM PST by Xenalyte (I may not agree with your bumper sticker, but I'll defend to the death your right to stick it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GunsareOK
I'm one of the "hard-line conservatives" who won't be voting for Bush.

Bear one thing in mind that if enough people vote as you do and the Democratic nominee wins -- recall what the Florida Nader vote did, in 2000 -- then Howard Dean and Hillary Clinton will be picking Supreme Court and other federal judges who will serve for DECADES. So even if, in 2008 or beyond, a more fitting-to-you conservative were to be elected, he or she would be saddled with left-wing courts that mandate more and more spending and taxes.

136 posted on 12/30/2003 12:48:42 PM PST by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
You are a GOP-bot because this admin is a godsend for your personal wealth.

As you have stated in this post, you will be doing zero to wage war against liberals in the most important political event of 2004. Hilarious handle.

I am a GOP-bot because it is the only defender of American conservatism, as far as political parties go, in existence. I'm also an American capitalist and not a FRinge socialist like you and Pat Buchanan.

137 posted on 12/30/2003 12:48:49 PM PST by Texas_Dawg (Waging war against the American "worker".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: StoneColdGOP
" I supported him hoping he'd defend us against the illegal alien invasion. He has not. In fact he seeks to grant AMNESTY."

Ok,I'll try with you-Where and when has President Bush ever said he supported amnesty for illegals ??
138 posted on 12/30/2003 12:49:01 PM PST by Wild Irish Rogue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Fishrrman
Right. Good point.
139 posted on 12/30/2003 12:49:16 PM PST by RinaseaofDs (Only those who dare truly live - CGA 88 Class Motto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Who is John Galt?
In other words, in '94 one out of every five actual voters was a gun owner voting Republican - and 'Dubyah' has announced that he is prepared to piss on their constitutional rights...

One issue wonder - how will our (NRA here also) RKBA be reclaimed under a Democrat President?

Just curious.

140 posted on 12/30/2003 12:49:16 PM PST by !1776!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: antaresequity
If he does not let the AWB sunset, and make it perfectly clear that he will veto any re-introduction...he can kiss my butt.

He won in 2000 while promising to sign the AWB, though it's clear he'd rather have no part in it, and almost certainly won't have to sign it now.

So I take it you told him to kiss your butt in 2000 and voted for . . . Gore? Buchanan? Nader? Because Bush is only 99% pro-gun?

141 posted on 12/30/2003 12:49:40 PM PST by JohnnyZ (Abolish the food tax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident
"Bush will appoint no SC judges in the next 5 years. Not one activist judge, by nature, will step down and allow a conservative justice to be appointed. Not a possibility.
You think they will all still be alive in 5 years? I'd take that action, might even give you odds."

$500?

Your argument that the great conservative Bush will appoint SC justices is bullsh**. You have to rely on them DYING to even make the case. Yet, as a Bushbot, that is EXACTLY your LIKELY scenario. Sorry. No sale.
142 posted on 12/30/2003 12:49:49 PM PST by At _War_With_Liberals
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
That is what we called rock bands we liked in the 80's. Congratulations.

I thought you did like ad-hominems?

143 posted on 12/30/2003 12:50:02 PM PST by !1776!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: JustAnAmerican
Evidently, you do not value your vote as a vote for any one who does not have any remote chance of winning is a vote for the democratic candidate. President Bush has not been what I wanted in the fiscal conservative arena, the CFR (who would have ever thought the supremes would have upheld that piece of trash, or the border,ie illegal aliens issue, but I will take him over any of the democratic contenders any day and that is really the issue.
144 posted on 12/30/2003 12:50:46 PM PST by waRNmother.armyboots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rintense
"The advancement of conservatism can not (and will not) happen overnight in this country."

It is not going to happen at all.
145 posted on 12/30/2003 12:52:10 PM PST by At _War_With_Liberals
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: GunsareOK; All
I'm one of the "hard-line conservatives" who won't be voting for Bush.

Each one has to make his/her own decision.

One issue that emerged from the California Recall is anger at pandering to Illegal Immigrants, and Bush could cause his own defeat.

146 posted on 12/30/2003 12:52:40 PM PST by Lael (Bush to Middle Class: Send your kids to DIE in Iraq while I send your LIVELIHOODS to INDIA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
Your argument that the great conservative Bush will appoint SC justices is bullsh**. You have to rely on them DYING to even make the case. Yet, as a Bushbot, that is EXACTLY your LIKELY scenario. Sorry. No sale.

People like you have to lurk in the dark recesses of the web because very few people agree with you in real life. This is why you are statistically insignificant and why George W. Bush is very smart in ignoring you. Your candidate will be crushed by GWB in 2004. Enjoy. Loser.

147 posted on 12/30/2003 12:52:40 PM PST by Texas_Dawg (Waging war against the American "worker".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
That is what we called rock bands we liked in the 80's. Congratulations.

I would have said "wicked awesome", but I'm not sure y'all'd understand Mainer.

148 posted on 12/30/2003 12:52:48 PM PST by JohnnyZ (Abolish the food tax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Some of these folks sound a lot like coward dean. If I'm not the candidate my constituency will NOT vote at all....so there!!!!
149 posted on 12/30/2003 12:52:51 PM PST by OldFriend (Always understand, even if you remain among the few)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
"The advancement of conservatism can not (and will not) happen overnight in this country."

It is not going to happen at all.

===

Especially, when people claiming to be conservatives are working hard to get leftist peaceniks like Dean get elected.
150 posted on 12/30/2003 12:53:31 PM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 501-535 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