Posted on 05/31/2005 6:36:27 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
George Bush, the president's father, would like to see another Bush in the White House someday, saying on Tuesday that he would want his son Jeb to run for president when the timing is right.
Florida Governor Jeb Bush has repeatedly said he does not plan to run for president in 2008, trying to dampen speculation that another Bush could be on the next Republican ticket for the White House.
In an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live," former President Bush said he would want Jeb to run for president "someday," but now was not the time.
"The timing's wrong. The main thing is, he doesn't want to do it. Nobody believes that," Bush said.
But he and wife Barbara both said they believed Jeb, 52, did not want to run in the next presidential race.
Bush said he did not have a favorite candidate for the Republican nomination to succeed his son, President Bush.
Barbara Bush said she believed Senator and former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton would be the Democratic nominee in the 2008 presidential race. "I'm not going to vote for her, but I'm betting on her," she said.
You're slipping. Didn't manage to bash Jeb on Schiavo until post 12.
Agreed. GWB on Domestic issues has been a total dissapointment.
If one has to be a criminal in order to 'lead' then you have a warped sense of what leadership is.
We don't live under British rule... Thank-God some people have enough back-bone to know when to take a stand regardless of the rules men lay upon us.
So shouldn't Governor Bush have sent people to all the abortion clinics to stop each and every abortion as well?
I think it would be a mistake for Jeb to run for President or Vice President in 08. He has family matters he must attend to, plus nominating another member of the Bush family to run for the White House immediately after 8 years of W would turn off a lot of people. Jeb is a good man, a very smart man, and his day will come, and when that day comes I WILL support him, but not 08.
Not today. Maybe some other time.
Can we get a ZOT over here? QUICKLY?
Where the heck are the Mods? This is crazy.
You pinged me, so it would behoove you to know this about me:
I am of German descent, and you offend me.
You WILL be arrested.
It will be my mission to not only find out your home address and your name, but to see to it that you go down painfully.
You are committing several felony acts with your continued harassment.
You would be SMART to just walk away now and never return.
Due to your behavior, many of us are ready to petition the site owner for the range of IP addresses you have used so that we can independantly take action against you.
We can also go to your ISP and have you barred from internet access due to violating terms of service.
I'm sure if you looked at your fine print you would see that your behavior would get you barred from internet access as well as possible legal action taken against you.
He and many other professional politicians have stood by for years and allowed that kind of government sanctioned murder. Murder sanctioned via our court system. That kind of society sanctioned murder is the precursor from which the killing of an innocent woman via starvation justified by our courts has sprung.
Unlike murder by abortion behind closed doors sanctioned by courts the murder of Terry Schiavo was a very different thing. Those sick enough to agree with the left that murder via court sanctioned abortion is sensible because "it's the mothers body" or "right to choose" or whatever cannot extend that very wrong argument to a fully grown living and breathing person. One who clearly has not only rights under the US Constitution but also under Florida law. The executive should have protected Terry and Jeb Bush could have if only he had the gonads to risk his precious political career.
So, while your question may prompt the duller among us to see the killing of the unborn as a justification to kill a grown woman (the question cuts both ways) I certainly do not. But if you can offer an arguement that it was morally, ethically or in any way you can imagine proper to kill the woman via court sanctioned starvation let's hear it.
I sometimes wonder if the ability to easily identify right from wrong is a natural thing or maybe it comes from the way people have been raised. I know I have the ability to easily identify right from wrong. I'm puzzled when I do not see that ability in others.
I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. I'm saying that those conservatives who suddenly became outraged at Jeb Bush and withdrew their support of him because of Terri Schiavo have a bad case of selective outrage. They should have been equally outraged at him for allowing thousands upon thousands of abortions under his watch, simply because the courts said abortion was OK. I see absolutely no difference between an abortion and what happened to Terri Schiavo. I submit that anyone who opposes Jeb Bush because he didn't do enough to save Terri Schiavo should have begun opposing him the moment the first abortion occurred after he became governor.
I better get in on this.
I was thinking the same thing.
Ah, so this "new" court sanctioned murder is something "conservatives" or anyone else should not complain about if they have not complained about past murder via abortion? Sorry, that does not hold water.
Again, this is a basic right vs wrong issue. If Jeb Bush had the inner strength to simply do the right thing and let the cards fall where they may that would show true moral character and real leadership. You can make this abortion vs starving comparison until the cows come home but the fact is that Jeb Bush did not go the distance in a situation where a woman was being murdered via starvation while her mother and father and family were made to watch.
I'm sorry but you can't "get there" by bringing up the abortion issue because there is nowhere to go. It's a red herring.
Thanks for looking up that link. Here is some more info on Jeb Bush from it:
Jeb Bush of Florida has garnered an impressive
record of tax cutting by successfully
fighting against sales tax increases and phasing
down the states dreaded intangibles tax.
Remarkable among current incumbent governors,
Bush has presided over $10 billion in
total tax cuts since his first day in office.
---
The fiscal record of Jeb Bushs past two
years shows some blemishes that have
bumped his grade from an A in 2002 to a B
this year. His tax record is still one of the
most impressive of any governor. He has proposed
and signed into law a tax cut virtually
every year of his tenure so farranging from
cuts in property taxes to cuts in the fuel tax
to a phaseout of the intangibles tax (a tax on
certain financial assets, including stocks and
bonds). The blemishes on his record have
lately come in the form of larger budgets.
Although his first term was remarkable for
its spending restraint, his last two proposed
budgets have grown substantially faster than
population and inflation. His 2004 general
fund budget proposal grew by 8 percent, and
his 2005 budget proposalincluding the
supplemental additionsgrew by a whopping
15 percent. Bush is also not immune to
corporate welfare schemes: he handed $310
million in taxpayer money to the Scripps
Institute to lure it to Florida from La Jolla,
California. Scaling back the rate of increase
of the state budget will be vital to a better
grade on the 2006 report card.
This doesn't take into account Charter school legislation - something that is a top priority in my book and something that GW Bush has dropped the ball on and tort reform, both of which CATO doesn't measure, but Jeb has done well on. Looks like he's slipping a bit with spending now though... Interestingly, that CATO report seems to show how when governors settle into power they start grabbing more power and taxing and spending more.
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.