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

To: Rastus

I realize this comment is going to be somewhat unfair, but I’m going to say it anyway. Look what eight years of no vocal conservative leadership has brought us.

Bush has been good on a few issues. Very few. On the others he’s been moderate to wildly left.

Look folks, I know he’s been good on the war, but mercy, doubling the Department of Education’s budget in less than four years? Pushing through another ‘Great Society’ program, the medication addition to Medicare? Allowing people from terrorist states to still come to the U.S.? Allowing our border to stay wide open, and fighting anyone who tried to close it? And then the main reason why ‘we had to have him’, judicial appointments, he gets his chance and nominates Harriet Meyers. Heavens! Is this what we have come to? Is this conservatism?

Look at this. The guy didn’t have a clue more often than not. No one championed our cause at the federal level. And now after eight years some stupidos want to start another eight years in the wilderness. HELL NO!

The RP leadership is a complete disaster. The only time they want to hear from me is the twelve months before an election. The other three years they couldn’t care less if I moved to Borneo. If I send a letter, make a phone call, fax a note, they stick their noses up in the air and cancel the fricken border fence program, or pass another trade policy parceling off our sovereignty.

We don’t have another eight years to watch these bastards disemble our nation. And I’ll be not part of it.

We need a man in the White House that knows what conservatism is, knows how to implemnt it, and knows how to explain it to our fellow citizens so they can get behind it.

If we don’t force our team to loft someone we fits this bill, then we need a third party or we need to prepare for what is to come. We’re not rolling back Marxist advances. They Marxists roll on. Well, I’m not playing that game any longer.

If the RP wants to go belly up, they’re doing one hell of a job of going about it.


40 posted on 01/09/2008 12:04:43 AM PST by DoughtyOne (< fence >< sound immigration policies >< /weasles >< /RINOs >< /Reagan wannabees that are liberal >)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: DoughtyOne
Bush has been good on a few issues.

When it comes to good on a few issues or good on no issues, I'm gonna go with good on a few issues. President Bush has made me darned mad when it comes to certain things, but I would be in a straight jacket now if it had been Gore or Kerry in there. We've probably got two Supreme Court nominations coming up this next go around and it will more likely than not be a better outcome with a Republican in there than a Dem. I know about Souter but I said more likely. I'm going with the Repub. That's the best chance I've got.

63 posted on 01/09/2008 12:25:45 AM PST by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne
This time, that same old tired argument that you have to vote for a Republican even if (R-Hell) is after his name, will fall upon the deaf ears of millions of Conservatives in November, if it turns out that way.

They are already cranking up that machine here on FR. They did four and eight years ago.

Many people listened.

They don't want "Son of G.W. Bush Compassionate Conservatism", nor their vote going to affirm such lamebrain policies, so I predict this scare tactic will be dismissed on its face--if a RINO is shoved in our faces for November.

94 posted on 01/09/2008 12:47:24 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo (Why should RINOs ask for my vote in November when they & MSM screwed True Conservatives?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

That about sums up what I’ve been thinking ever since this field of candidates formed.


113 posted on 01/09/2008 1:09:16 AM PST by Rastus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

So what is your solution? Allowing a Democrat to get the WH? And how is that going to help the conservative cause? I’m not trying to be being a smart @$$. I really want to know.


153 posted on 01/09/2008 3:10:05 AM PST by beckysueb (Pray for our troops , America, and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne
Doughty, is Harriet Meyers Chief Justice? That would be a “No”. Why? Because we had someone in the White House that at least listened when his party went ballistic. Do you think you will get the same consideration from a Clinton or Obama?

My biggest concern still has to be the WOT. Imagine the very worst outcome possible and that’s probably better than what we will have if a Dem wins the White House. Our military folks have had an uncertain enough time just with Pelosi and Reid in charge, now imagine these two losers with a Dem president.

I’m sorry, man, conservative principals (and I was a conservative before they even had a name!) are a wonderful thing, but I refuse to worry, every day, about some American city/cities falling victim to an Islamofacist’s nuke. The federal government’s primary responsibility, as far as I’m concerned, is to protect me, my family, my community, etc., and I don’t see any dim lib Dems that are willing to do so. All but one of the Republican candidates seem to take this responsibility seriously, even the ones you term RINOs.

Don’t take this to mean I’m giving up! I’ll be in there pitching, doing the same things I’ve done for over 50 years during campaigns—working phone banks, going door to door, on and on, ad infinitum........but IF my guy loses, I’ll vote for the Republican candidate because he’s still better than a Democrat. Politics is usually a matter of comparatives, and not of absolutes. I haven’t met my perfect conservative candidate yet, but I’m still looking!

154 posted on 01/09/2008 3:10:12 AM PST by singfreedom ("Victory at all costs,.....for without victory there is no survival." Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne
Look at this. The guy didn’t have a clue more often than not.

You're too charitable. I think he has had malicious intent on some things (border enforcement, Ramos/Compean for starters).

232 posted on 01/09/2008 4:54:29 AM PST by sauropod (Welcome to O'Malleyland. What's in your wallet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

My sentiments as well....and I suspect many ..here.. who are true conservatives echo your heartfelt angst.


236 posted on 01/09/2008 4:58:08 AM PST by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter...President '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

Even considering the cronysim/poor choice of Meyers (which thankfully did not come to pass), George gets super high marks from me for his judicial placements, and that will have more lasting positive effect on our country than his big government republican spending.

And while I’d much prefer a social and fiscal conservative Republican in the white house next time around, frankly I’m most interested in keeeping someone likely to keep appointing right-minded judges to the bench, regardless of their fiscal conservatism or personal social stands. We are just one good conservative SC justice away from beginning to setriously dispatch the tyranny of the left through the federal courts, and Stevens and/or Ginsburg could easily retire/pass on in the next four years.

So it comes down to this, do I want to take a chance on the nominee coming from Obama/Hillary/Edwards, or from any of the current crop of republican candidates? I’d much rather take my chances on any of the R’s. That’s enough for me to know that whoever it is in Nov, I’ll be voting R for president.


266 posted on 01/09/2008 5:31:14 AM PST by cschroe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne
“they stick their noses up in the air and cancel the fricken border fence program, or pass another trade policy parceling off our sovereignty.”

You are not alone in your frustration.

In addition the whole “War on Terror” seems like a facade. We give out visas left and right, the borders are wide open and illegal immigration is encouraged and rewarded. Yet we’re supposed to be serious about defending the US? We’re safer because we can’t take chap stick on an airplane?

This way of securing and running the USA is what bothers me the most. If Washington DC genuinely cared about what is best for the US, then after 9-11 they would have done something about legal and illegal immigration. It just boggles the mind.

444 posted on 01/09/2008 3:00:36 PM PST by Aglooka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | 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