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

Skip to comments.

Poll: Is George W. Bush a True Conservative?
Paul Revere Society ^ | 12/01/2004 | Paul Revere Society

Posted on 12/01/2004 5:19:59 PM PST by YoungKentuckyConservative

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 next last
To: Phsstpok

"You assume, in your infinite wisdom and years of experience as leader of the free world, that Bush doesn't want these things? Hubris, thy name is ideologue. "

Wow - why the hostility?


"Bush does what is POSSIBLE, while making sure that he does what is MANDATORY. I trust his judgement (and access to information) a whole hell of a lot more than yours (or mine). "


Let's see - with a Republican majority in Congress, Bush has presided over the largest increase in federal spending since LBJ and has increased the gov't at a greater rate than even Clintax. With a rubber-stamp Congress, reducing the size of gov't and decreasing domestic spending (spending not related to WOT...crap such as the boondoggle Socialist expansion of Medicare) should be 'POSSIBLE'. This President hasn't tried nor shown any interest in doing so. Like all politicians, Bush is one.



"I want less federal government, less government spending and more secure borders. I guarantee you that George W. Bush also supports those things. That is a 100% certainty, I have no doubt whatsoever. I think President Bush is also trying to avoid a full blown "World War 4" involving nuclear weapons exchanges, while also trying to avoid a race war in this country. "


So please explain why, in this WOT, Bush has prudently decided to make it EASIER for illegals to reside in this country with his idiotic amnesty program.


"You gotta do what is possible, not only what is pure. That is why we lost for nearly 50 years. The dims were content with incremental wins, while we would accept nothing less than 100%. Guess who ruled for most of a century? You also have to be alive and in office to do anything at all, however pure you may think you are. "


No argument. It's why I'm mad that, now that we have a GOP majority, absolutely nothing has changed when it comes to federal spending, except the fact that it's increased.


"I hate to say this, but you're one of the 80%, though I dont't think you're a loon, per se. I do think you have blinders on and haven't thought it through. "


Actually, I think it is you who has the blinders on. The Bushbot blinders - rendering you unable to see that this president is about as conservative as Clintax. In all measures of political conservancy, except for anti-gay measures, Bush is a liberal.


"And you already know the sound a loon makes, even if you don't realize it."

Yeah, it's pretty spoooky sounding, especially in a N. Wisconsin lake at sunset!


61 posted on 12/02/2004 12:29:43 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
Wow - why the hostility?

Wow - why the knee jerk leftist "I'm a victim" reaction to someone actually daring to question your wisdom with a little (and I emphasize little) sarcasm? Skin a little thin? Or maybe just a bit too close to truth for you?

Let's see - with a Republican majority in Congress...

Hmmmm. Sounds straight out of the Democrat talking points. In fact it's almost word for word out of John Sperling's psychotic drivel. Your infantile and puerile bitching about how evil Republicans are just doesn't stand up to quiet, reasoned, examination. We're dealing with 70 years of bureaucratic inertia, so you aren't happy because it didn't happen Tuesday? And so, you get even more shrill.

I think I'm done with this, and with you. Contact me when you grow up, or get a new fax from Carville, whichever comes first.

- 30 -

62 posted on 12/02/2004 1:41:12 PM PST by Phsstpok (Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform - Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok

"Wow - why the knee jerk leftist "I'm a victim" reaction to someone actually daring to question your wisdom with a little (and I emphasize little) sarcasm? Skin a little thin? Or maybe just a bit too close to truth for you?"


Why the knee-jerk hostility and name-calling more closely associated with the DU debater? IS it because you are unable to refute the facts I cited - that our gov't has grown larger and spent more under the GOP than under any Dem? My skin isn't thin, nor is my head firmly entrenched in the sands of the BushBot Desert, unlike yours.


"Sounds straight out of the Democrat talking points. In fact it's almost word for word out of John Sperling's psychotic drivel. Your infantile and puerile bitching about how evil Republicans are just doesn't stand up to quiet, reasoned, examination. We're dealing with 70 years of bureaucratic inertia, so you aren't happy because it didn't happen Tuesday? And so, you get even more shrill."


Let's see..blahblahblah...insulting adjective...blahblah...more excuses for GOP pork and lack of true fiscal conservatism...blahblahblah...something about Tuesday... Nope - nothing factual to refute the truth. Just more DU-like, Bush-bot denial.


"I think I'm done with this, and with you. Contact me when you grow up, or get a new fax from Carville, whichever comes first."


Let's see...a quitting of a thread since you have nothing factual to back up your Bushbot-ness...attitude and arrogance about 'being done' after actually losing...yet another insult about my age....Yep - that about covers all the talking points of a DU poster's method of political discussion! Back to DU ya go!

I'm truly glad you're "done with me". I won't have to waste - and believe me, your post was a complete waste of time - any more bandwidth trying to remove your Bushbot head from the Desert of Ignorance.


"- 30 -"

Umm.. * 32 *


63 posted on 12/02/2004 1:50:52 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

>>Let's see - with a Republican majority in Congress, Bush has presided over the largest increase in federal spending since LBJ and has increased the gov't at a greater rate than even Clintax. With a rubber-stamp Congress, reducing the size of gov't and decreasing domestic spending (spending not related to WOT...crap such as the boondoggle Socialist expansion of Medicare) should be 'POSSIBLE'. This President hasn't tried nor shown any interest in doing so. Like all politicians, Bush is one.<<

Sept. 11th 2001. 'Nuff said.

When the pluses and minuses of President G.W. Bush's legacy are calculated, he'll be remembered for just one issue: How did he prosecute the war on terrorism. The questionable spending, which is indeed questionable on multiple fronts, won't even be remembered.

The moment the jetliners appeared in Manhattan's beautiful blue sky, all of the stuff that dogmatic ideologues -- from either the right or the left -- vanished just as thoroughly as the Twin Towers vanished.

nationalized health care. getting rid of the NEA. getting rid of CPB. getting rid of the Dept. of Education. the minimum wage.

whether it's a pet project of the right or the left, none of those will matter if Americans are obliged by their new dictators to face Mecca three times a day. Until the Islamic dictators are consigned to the ash heap of the 21st century, literally and figuratively, the rest of that stuff is window dressing for the chattering classes of the right-wing and left-wing.

We have to preserve our civilization first and foremost, before we worry about the cute but less relevant issues. Let's finish off the terrorists and the regimes that harbor and support them.

-George


64 posted on 12/02/2004 2:01:09 PM PST by gaa1980198420002004 (RWR and GWB fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
Umm.. * 32 *

Clueless

Sad AND clueless.

65 posted on 12/02/2004 2:05:21 PM PST by Phsstpok (Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform - Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: gaa1980198420002004

"Sept. 11th 2001. 'Nuff said. "

With all due respect, the increases in the boondoggle Medicare program had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. When you take out the increases necessary and due to the WOT, Bush still outspent every president not named LBJ. That's not some whiner comment or leftist nonsense (I've never voted DEM), but simple fact.


"The questionable spending, which is indeed questionable on multiple fronts, won't even be remembered. "

Unlike a prior poster, at least you admit that it's questionable. Just because I voted for him doesn't mean I'm giving him a blank check to spend, spend, spend! I do appreciate your honesty here.


"nationalized health care. "

Yet, he signed legislation for a $540 Billion (last estimate I saw) Medicare program.


"Let's finish off the terrorists and the regimes that harbor and support them. "

Yeah, but let's try not to completely bankrupt our country and several future generations in the process.

Thanks for your response!


66 posted on 12/02/2004 2:10:59 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; iconoclast

There is only one other place on the internet where people care about the "PNAC" nonsense.

You get three guesses where. :P


67 posted on 12/02/2004 2:11:21 PM PST by Constantine XIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok

"Clueless

Sad AND clueless."


Wow - ignorant and a liar to boot! Didn't you say you were done with me? Like Bush when it comes to be a fiscal conservative, you're all talk and zero action.


$ 69 $


68 posted on 12/02/2004 2:12:15 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba; Phsstpok

Knock it off.


69 posted on 12/02/2004 2:19:50 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
You're a green-eye-shade conservative, aren't you?

Do you calculate your kids'allowance down to the penny?

70 posted on 12/02/2004 2:23:46 PM PST by sinkspur ("It is a great day to be alive. I appreciate your gratitude." God Himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative

He's not a conservative. Period.

Many Republicans aren't.


71 posted on 12/02/2004 2:25:45 PM PST by k2blader (It is neither compassionate nor conservative to support the expansion of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

Me (as gaa1980198420002004): **"Let's finish off the terrorists and the regimes that harbor and support them. "**

blzbaa: >>Yeah, but let's try not to completely bankrupt our country and several future generations in the process.<<

So is there some price you want to place on the cost of freedom? What is too much money to spend, in billions? Please be specific.

The fact is, all of the lefty whining about needing socialized medicine, the minimum wage, too many homeless people, along with the righty gripes (more than a few of them justified) about too much spending, too small of a tax cut, too much Sen. Kennedy influence in the education bill, the farm bill, etc., etc., none of that matters if we someday become obliged to face Mecca multiple times a day.

None of that matters if the Caliphate, or even a large percentage of it, is restored. Or even 0.00000000000000001 % of it.

None of that matters if the Islamic dictators and their catspaws can cow us sufficiently to withdraw from the world, appease the terrorists, and allow Islamic fascists to expand their control.

What does matter, is liberty. What does matter is spreading our experiment in freedom, paid for in countless drops of blood, paid by grieving relatives and spouses and friends, paid for with untold mangled limbs, to as many countries as possible. A country that has true freedom, a true free market that overall is non-Socialist, is going to be too busy making money to worry about destroying other countries.

When you have too much to lose, you don't spend a whole lot of time figuring out how to conquer the world.

We need to win the war on terrorism first and then worry about the second- and third-tier stuff later.

We have a"rendezvous with destiny." It is not over so long as Nazis or other fascists, so long as Communists and other fascists, so long as Jihadists and other fascists, plan the destruction of liberty.

We betray the blood, sweat and tears of Washington, Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and Reagan if we do not finish the task assigned to our generations. Washington nearly died, Lincoln was murdered for his stalwart efforts, and Roosevelt's health was probably destroyed. And who knows what sorrows Reagan endured when it wasn't always clear we could beat the Soviets.

Do you really want to leave those great leaders on the ash heap of history? Who will remember them if we fail? The terrorists?

If the Boomers, Gen-X and Gen-Y don't stay the course, the future generations you claim to be so concerned about face not bankruptcy, but slavery or death. Our rendezvous with destiny is far from over. Perhaps it never ends.

-George


72 posted on 12/03/2004 12:11:43 PM PST by Calif Conservative (RWR and GWB fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Calif Conservative

"The fact is, all of the lefty whining about needing socialized medicine"


Yet which President increased the money spent on Medicare to over half a trillion $$?


"Who will remember them if we fail? The terrorists? "

The terrorists cannot and will not ever overrun this country. They've no standing army, no navy to blockade shipping, no police force to keep a civilian population in check, etc. I'm not afraid of the 'threat' they pose and feel far more fear driving on our nation's highways than I do from dying from terrorism. If they're foolish enough to use any major WMD, they can be nuked into non-existence. Sorry, but I'm just not cowering in fear over the evil, boogeyman terrorists. Apparently our President isn't either, or he wouldn't be whoring our our southern border to illegal immigrants.


"the future generations you claim to be so concerned about face not bankruptcy, but slavery or death. "

Please. Until I see a single terrorist navy or standing army or police force, I see nothing to be as terrified as you. Quite frankly, it's attitudes like these that scare me more than the terrorists - this quivering idea that we're all doomed. Screw that. I'm not letting Muslime rule my psyche.


"Perhaps it never ends."

Woohoo! Eternal war! What an awesome way to live life, always in fear of the turbaned boogeyman! Not I.

Besides, if the country and free world (absolute worst case scenario, obviously) does go broke, how will we pay to continue killing Muslime? Those bullets cost $$.


In terms of losing one's liberty, stuff like the Patriot Act and the SCOTUS are far greater threats to liberty loss than the evil boogeyman terrorist.


73 posted on 12/03/2004 12:35:39 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

>The terrorists cannot and will not ever overrun this country. I'm not afraid of the 'threat' they pose and feel far more fear driving on our nation's highways than I do from dying from terrorism.<

I wonder if the 3,000 victims on 9/11 used a highway to get to work? They were sure safe once they got to work or on their airplanes!

>In terms of losing one's liberty, stuff like the Patriot Act and the SCOTUS are far greater threats to liberty loss than the evil boogeyman terrorist.

Right up there with the threats to your liberty posed by Ashcroft! and Halliburton! And the Carlyle Group! And Richard Mellon Scaife! The Bilderbergers are coming!

And don't forget that BUSH LIED !!

-George


74 posted on 12/07/2004 11:48:46 AM PST by Calif Conservative (RWR and GWB fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative

" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04


75 posted on 12/07/2004 11:54:57 AM PST by Protagoras (Government exists to defend rights, nothing more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative

To a liberal Bush is a conservative

To a conservative (like myself) Bush is a eletist and pompous could care less about middle America and isnt willing to fight for values in America. He tries to sound like he really cares about morals but hardly does a thing to change the dialect. Supports in words only marriage and ending abortion he is for Affirmative action (racism), limiting free speech, growing our govt. and hurting our schools, hospitals and wages with his illegal alien concessions. My feelings for Bush have changed, he was born with a silver spoon and now is showing his true colors.


76 posted on 12/07/2004 11:59:33 AM PST by sasafras (sasafras (The road to hell is paved with good intentions))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calif Conservative

Watch out for those evil terrorists under your bed, George!!! BE AFRAID!!!

FEAR FEAR FEAR the evil terrorists!


77 posted on 12/07/2004 12:10:50 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

>>Watch out for those evil terrorists under your bed, George!!! BE AFRAID!!! FEAR FEAR FEAR the evil terrorists!

Your polemic aside, it seems as if your bogeymen are the Supreme Court, President Bush and A.G. Ashcroft, based on your fears of the judicial system and the Patriot Act.

But the last time I looked, they didn't murder 3,000 people, demolish two high rises, wreck part of the Pentagon, destroy several jetliners, erase $1 trillion in wealth from the U.S. economy and cause about 500,000-1 million people to lose their jobs.

-George


78 posted on 12/08/2004 3:07:54 PM PST by Calif Conservative (RWR and GWB fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Calif Conservative

"But the last time I looked, they didn't murder 3,000 people, demolish two high rises, wreck part of the Pentagon, destroy several jetliners, erase $1 trillion in wealth from the U.S. economy and cause about 500,000-1 million people to lose their jobs. "


No, those were the Saudis, who are still our middle East oil buddies. No Iraqi was on any jetliner.


79 posted on 12/09/2004 7:15:50 AM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

**G: "But the last time I looked, they didn't murder 3,000 people, demolish two high rises, wreck part of the Pentagon, destroy several jetliners, erase $1 trillion in wealth from the U.S. economy and cause about 500,000-1 million people to lose their jobs. "**

>>B: No, those were the Saudis, who are still our middle East oil buddies.<<

That's because the bogeymen you *really* fear, President Bush, A.G. Ashcroft and Chief Justice Rehnquist and his cronies, are the real enemies of this country, and not the terrorists -- according to you.

After all, those folks concocted the EEEEEEVILLLLLLL PATRIOT ACT which was designed to secretly steal the liberties of unwitting Americans -- according to you.

>>No Iraqi was on any jetliner.<<

So we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan, either, to use what passes for your "logic."

-George


80 posted on 12/09/2004 1:55:31 PM PST by Calif Conservative (RWR and GWB fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 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