Posted on 06/05/2002 1:20:54 PM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
Bingo! You nailed it. There are two kind of conservatives: the armchair idealists who are too purist to get anything done, and the pragmatists who have to make the hard decisions about what is doable and what isn't. The pragmatists are the ones who are actually getting anything accomplished. The rest sit back and whine. Someone quoted Reagan in a similar thread yesterday: "Get what we can now; the rest we'll come back for later."
But I read where the JBS thought Reagan was a communist. This was before I came to FR. I thought it was a joke, and that no conservative really thought that way about Uncle Ronnie.
Now I can see that they just may have said those things about Reagan.
Wow...
Oh, poo, that's horse crap, even Ray Charles can see this, for Christ sakes. For example, this titanic invasion of millions of illegal aliens has been going on for 20 years or so. When the Presidents DAD was in office!!! What has been done Poo? We now have the President giving speeches in Spanish and all you neocons think its cool. He has even tried to push legalizing illegal aliens in light of this massive invasion. In a war time yet?
Try 37, when your good buddies the Democrats ended the bracero program.
Oh, I see, so its all the dummy Democrats fault. Boy, you sure put all that into perspective Poo. Lets go get them Democrats.....
IOTW -- quit wasting bandwidth and your time on this crap and start focussing on 2002 elections! If your Agenda is for Keyes, Buchanan, or whoever to challenge in 2004, then we will know if these hit pieces against President Bush and us continue! Which is it? Are you with us in 2002 or are you going to continue to try and split out the conservatives in order to follow your own agendas?
What do you mean "if"? I thought the whole strategy of taking the "issues" away from the Democrats was to ensure Republican Majorities in congress. If we don't get solid majorities in congress, then what was the point? Karl Rove has guaranteed a Republican victory, don't worry;-)
As I recall how this came down was that GWB's administration is not vetting through the ABA; however, Leahy and his band of merry men are.
What tax cut? There was nothing substantial about it whatsoever. On 9/11, what has Bush done that a Democrat in office wouldn't have done? We were attacked. Bush bombed back. Even Clinton or Gore could have handled that. And Bush's poll numbers? When did conservatives start giving a rat's patoot about poll numbers?
My reaction would have been it's about F'n time! I was quite aware of all the terriorst attacks our country had suffered, here and abroad. I also read an interview with bin Laden two years ago where he spelled out his mission to kill American. All Americans. It gave me a nasty feeling in the pit of my stomach.
• Would you have criticized a Democrat president for signing a $26 billion education-spending bill?
Yep! I didn't much like what I was shown of the bill, but keep in mind President Bush got everything he thought was important except for vouchers. Those too shall come
• Did you feel betrayed when Bush signed Campaign Finance Reform into law?
Nope. As hard may be for you and those of third parties types and Libertairians to understand, I trust my president. He knows what he's doing and what better way to get rid of it than have the Supreme Court decide, since USSC has already declared a same sort of case unconstitutional. Then Mr Macain can't bring that one up again and try to make politic hay with Bush.
• What do you think about Bush's position on granting amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants?
Makes more sense than to try to round up every last one and boot 'em out. These are people that have lived and worked here with no crimminal record, but I'm sure you've heard the logic before.
• Would you have tolerated a Democrat proposal for federally funded faith-based initiatives?
Since dems are so slimly I would have to learn from an expert to tell me if that's really the dems plan or if it's another Dept. fo ED.
• What would your reaction have been if a Democrat had said, "No one should have to pay more than a third of their income to the federal government"?
See answer from previous question.
• What do you think about the president's granting of Permanent Most Favored Nation status to China?
Now this was the one thing I don't agree with. But I'll bet my right pinky toe President Bush knows much more about what's going on over there. And if I lived in California I'd appreciate it if our country and China are getting along. I think over time they're come around. Yes, longer than we'd like, but in the mean time, lets make it possible to have better relations with them. (and watch them like a hawk!)
• What's the difference between Bush and the Democrats on the issue of farm subsidies?
Haven't had time to study that one, I'll have to come to this one.
How would you react if a Democrat president sent a $2.13 trillion budget to Congress?
You are aware that we are fighting terriorists all over the world and in our country. It's going to take more money, what's so had to grasp about that? When the congress doesn't lose billions of dollars a year, would you like to know my reaction to that?!
• Would you have stood for a Democrat saying "No!" to arming airline pilots?
No, and I'm not all that pleased that President Bush doesn't support it. Then again, I don't know beans about Airline Pilots and guns on planes, so once again, I'll trust My President.
• Are you willing to stand by and let the Bush administration cater to the environmentalists on the global warming issue?
Did you miss the many threads that explained about that whole NYTimes slop? This was debunked yesterday.
• What do you think about Bush's call for a Patient's Bill of Rights?
When President Bush issues a report on a Patient's Bill Of Rights and then I read it, I'll let you know then.
• What one thing has Bush done that sets him apart from the Democrats?
We no longer send money overseas or foreign countries for abortions.
• It's been a year-and-a-half since Bush took office. When do we start to see a decrease in the size and scope of government? For that matter, when do we start to see even a remote indication that this administration will think about doing anything to try to limit the federal government?
Remeber that pesky little terrorism thing, it costs lots and lots, bring in the FBI and the CIA and the NSA costs money, hiring new people who can help translate or infiltrate, costs money. Build up the military after 8 years of neglect, costs an astonishing amount of money. The clean up and build of TWC and the Pentagon costs lots of money.
Plus all the little day to day crap the government hands out to those who don't need it.
Shown some backbone.
AMEN!
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.