Our "Conservative" President - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Our "Conservative" President (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:29:09 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Quoted:
By the way, what has the President done in his 5 yrs to further the Conservative movement ?

First and foremost, three words: Chief Justice Roberts

So Bush nominates a judge that MIGHT honor the Constitution, while Bush himself violates teh COnstitution creating bigger and bogger gov't, OUTSEPNDING EVERY OTHER DEMOCRAT IN HISTORY.

With "Conservatives" like that, "Liberals" are redundant.

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:31:35 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:

It's unconstitutional to give disaster aid and rebuilding aid? Or is it unconstitutional to screw people? I'm confused.

Yes.

Until you can show me where in the constitution its authoriized under the doctrine of specific enumeration, its unConstitutional.

Same with charity aid to Israel, or Ghana, or any other country.

Fair enough, but really, is this such a new phenomenon? Unconstitutional actions by government I mean?

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:31:37 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Its unconstitutional to use Federal Tax dollars for disaster relief.

I cant imagine the Framers supporting the Idea that taxes from all the States would be given to any one State for any in State problem.

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:32:23 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Its unconstitutional to use Federal Tax dollars for disaster relief.

I cant imagine the Framers supporting the Idea that taxes from all the States would be given to any one State for any in State problem.

Newsflash! Hurricane Katrina is a national problem!

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:33:20 PM EDT

[#5]

Bush had to step on the gas, we require a certain level of debt inflation to keep the economy going.

Katrina did significant damage to the economy as well as the infrastructure, it hasn't all filtered through yet but it's there, the housing market is also cooling off, which cuts off the flow of new debt from that sector.

We're caught in liquidity trap so large it's hard to see it unless you take a big step back and study it. If you don't understand why a "conservative" like Bush would act the way he is the monetary and macroeconomic systems are what you should study, that's where the answer lies.

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:37:55 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its unconstitutional to use Federal Tax dollars for disaster relief.

I cant imagine the Framers supporting the Idea that taxes from all the States would be given to any one State for any in State problem.

Newsflash! Hurricane Katrina is a national problem!

Really? How much flood damage did you get in Illinois?

and before you say "well what about the ports..." :Those ports are privately owned. Unless you beleive that it is the government's responsibility to subsidize industry (which is also unconstitutional) then the Feds have no business spending the nation's money to rebuild local stuff.

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:44:19 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its unconstitutional to use Federal Tax dollars for disaster relief.

I cant imagine the Framers supporting the Idea that taxes from all the States would be given to any one State for any in State problem.

Newsflash! Hurricane Katrina is a national problem!

If your home gets destroyed its NOT a National problem..

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:46:10 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
He vaguely resembles the great man I voted for.

What did he ever do prior to being elected the 43rd President that could be considered great?

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:47:04 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
I have always believed that our government works best when at least one of the three; house, senate, or executive, is held by the opposition party. It seems to limit the amount of damage .gov can do at any one time. I knew that when the Repub's won both legislatures and the presidency we were going to be in for a hell of a ride. The only saving grace is that it would be worse if the Dem's had total control--which I fear in the coming elections.

EXACTLY! split your tickets folks. Keep them arguing so they get less done because the more they get done the more they screw us all.

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:49:02 PM EDT

[#10]

maybe we should amend the constitution to say that congress only meets for 1 week a year or something.

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:53:13 PM EDT

[#11]

Your first post said it all for me crowboy. I never did have the blinders on though. I didn't vote in the last election because I didn't like the choices. Probably won't bother voting in the next one either.

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:57:20 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
maybe we should amend the constitution to say that congress only meets for 1 week a year or something.

Actually the constitution specifies congress meet at least once a year.

Show's where we were and how much things have changed.

Posted: 9/16/2005 12:59:10 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
maybe we should amend the constitution to say that congress only meets for 1 week a year or something.

It has been said the destruction of America happenned with the invention of the air conditioner....

...for it allowed politicians to stay in Washington year round to continue encumbering us with endless laws.

Posted: 9/16/2005 1:00:33 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

It's unconstitutional to give disaster aid and rebuilding aid? Or is it unconstitutional to screw people? I'm confused.

Yes.

Until you can show me where in the constitution its authoriized under the doctrine of specific enumeration, its unConstitutional.

Same with charity aid to Israel, or Ghana, or any other country.

Fair enough, but really, is this such a new phenomenon? Unconstitutional actions by government I mean?

At one point it WAS a new phenomenon. It isn't anymore. Back when it was new, they didn't stop it, so that duty falls to us.

Posted: 9/16/2005 1:18:53 PM EDT

[#15]

This is really sad. One side boo-hooing that GWB is bad a guy a liberal in conservative clothing, he's taking us down the path to socialism, Oh whoa is me! The other side is saying but he's better than Skerry or some other democrat would have been. Then there those who are belly-aching: It's unconstitutional to spend money of disaster relief, it's against the law.

What we are suffering from here is exactly what Mark Twain was talking about in this quote:

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."

It is so much easier to sit behind the keyboard and piss and moan than to get active politically, make your views known, support and elect individuals you know will reflect your views. Guys, I am far more conservative than most of you. I want limited government. But whining endlessly is not going to get us there. Without a genuine effort on our part to influence policy by electing people who share our viewpoint at the local, state and national level we are simply going to be dismissed as part of the lunatic fringe. I really believe if we spent half as much time messing around on the general discussion board, and used that time to try to influence others to our position on the issues we would reap far more support than we could imagine. If you are not active politically you have little room to bitch.

Posted: 9/16/2005 1:24:01 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
This is really sad. One side boo-hooing that GWB is bad a guy a liberal in conservative clothing, he's taking us down the path to socialism, Oh whoa is me! The other side is saying but he's better than Skerry or some other democrat would have been.

It is so much easier to sit behind the keyboard and piss and moan than to get active politically, .

It is easier JUST to whine.

SO I get politically active by trying to make the "he's not as bad as sKerry" folks to see that he is a liberal in conservatives clothing.

Posted: 9/16/2005 1:45:37 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
This is really sad. One side boo-hooing that GWB is bad a guy a liberal in conservative clothing, he's taking us down the path to socialism, Oh whoa is me! The other side is saying but he's better than Skerry or some other democrat would have been. Then there those who are belly-aching: It's unconstitutional to spend money of disaster relief, it's against the law.

What we are suffering from here is exactly what Mark Twain was talking about in this quote:

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."

It is so much easier to sit behind the keyboard and piss and moan than to get active politically, make your views known, support and elect individuals you know will reflect your views. Guys, I am far more conservative than most of you. I want limited government. But whining endlessly is not going to get us there. Without a genuine effort on our part to influence policy by electing people who share our viewpoint at the local, state and national level we are simply going to be dismissed as part of the lunatic fringe. I really believe if we spent half as much time messing around on the general discussion board, and used that time to try to influence others to our position on the issues we would reap far more support than we could imagine. If you are not active politically you have little room to bitch.

Most of the guys I know on this site are very active in politics and that is the point isnt it. I have posted a list of liberal laws and actions that the President and his partners in Congress have approved ( and I am sure I have forgot some ) So far I have seen 2 claims of conservatism on behalf of Mr Bush, 1- He "allowed" the AWB to die and 2 he appointed John Roberts to the Court. He did not allow anything regarding the AWB and even said he would sign it, Judge Roberts is a Phantom appointee at this time , it will take a couple of years to know where he is. Compare those 2 items with the long list of Liberal agenda that Mr Bush has supported and or allowed to pass and it becomes ridiculous. Enjoy your Kool Aid kids...

Posted: 9/16/2005 1:46:17 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

you people? this isnt about Kerry or Clinton other than the fact that our President has accomplished more Liberal agenda than the Commies like Hillery, Bill and Kerry could have ever hoped for.

Oh horsepuckey. What liberal agenda? The war in Iraq? If that is your idea of a liberal agenda, I would hate to see what you think conservative is.

And it does become about Kerry when someone, a gunowner, makes the idiotic remark that he should have voted for Kerry.

Posted: 9/16/2005 1:57:54 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

Kerry, would not have Christians sacrificing themselves on the "Alter of Freedom", Bush has set up in the Middle East.........

To establish an ISLAMIC state...............

Kerry, would NOT have been able to move through the socialist, big government legislation that Bush has.......

Hillary and Bill, are envious of him!!!

(PS. Yes, I told you all so!!!!

)

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:01:41 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Oh horsepuckey. What liberal agenda? The war in Iraq? If that is your idea of a liberal agenda, I would hate to see what you think conservative is.

I will list some of them for you again if you like, Kennedy's Education bill- ( the largest in history)
Farm Bill- (same as above )
Signing Campaign Finance reform- ( He stated that he believed it to be unconstitionual but signed it anyway)
Liberal trade status for China -( one of our real enemies in the world)
Highway Bill-( largest pork bill in decades )
Wanted to give Illegals amnesty-( has left our borders wide open )
I am sure there is more I have not listed but I would say these items are a pretty good agenda that any hard core liberal would be proud of.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:10:11 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Red, I guess you did not read my original post regarding my personal feelings about Mr Bush and please dont forget that He said he would sign the AWB again..

Please get a CLUE. If he had wanted to renew it, it would have been renewed. I can't believe some of you are still harping on this worn out lie.

If you felt this way, why did you vote for him again? I think someone is not being completely forthcoming.

"If George W. Bush truly wants an assault weapons ban, as he has led the public to believe, then he should aggressively fight for it, as he had done with other issues of importance to him," said Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Violence, a group fighting for renewal of the ban.

Gee, if this moron seems to get it, why don't some of the Bush bashers on this board seem to understand it?

Because they don't want to, it would remove one of their favorite dead horses.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:11:34 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

Kerry, would not have Christians sacrificing themselves on the "Alter of Freedom", Bush has set up in the Middle East.........

To establish an ISLAMIC state...............

Kerry, would NOT have been able to move through the socialist, big government legislation that Bush has.......

Hillary and Bill, are envious of him!!!

(PS. Yes, I told you all so!!!! )

Hi Liberty.

I've missed you.

I haven't missed your political tin-hat silliness.

But I've missed you.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:12:04 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember when there were those here who were just SURE that GW was going to extend the AWB when it got to his desk. Of course, it didn't. But the question is this: who would've been more likely to sign anti-gun legislation into law -- Bush or Kerry? If you REALLY think that it would have been Bush, then you really are wacked. Bush ain't perfect, but regardless of your negative attitudes about him -- he's STILL a million miles from Kerry (open borders, WMD's, and all).

Red, I guess you did not read my original post regarding my personal feelings about Mr Bush and please dont forget that He said he would sign the AWB again..

I'll well aware of what GW "said" he'd do in that instance. But I am also aware of the well-known possibility that he was playing games with the libs to lull them to sleep. The fact is, as Old Painless says... there is a HUGE difference between GW and Kerry and their camps. But if you can't see that, not much I can do about it. I would get your eyes checked before you drive again though...

You are correct in saying its not about what he said he would, its about what he has done. By the way, what has the President done in his 5 yrs to further the Conservative movement ? The Farm bill? The Education Bill? The Energy Bill? Proposing amesty for Illegals?Signing Campaign Finance reform? Liberal trade with China? Aids in Africa? Please tell me?

IOW, he has not done everything exactly as YOU want it, so it is a "liberal" agenda.

Boo hoo.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:13:59 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Its unconstitutional to use Federal Tax dollars for disaster relief.

Care to show us where it says that.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:15:27 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

you people? this isnt about Kerry or Clinton other than the fact that our President has accomplished more Liberal agenda than the Commies like Hillery, Bill and Kerry could have ever hoped for.

Oh horsepuckey. What liberal agenda? The war in Iraq? If that is your idea of a liberal agenda, I would hate to see what you think conservative is.

And it does become about Kerry when someone, a gunowner, makes the idiotic remark that he should have voted for Kerry.

Maybe you can name something "Conservative", Bush has iniatiated/signed into law???

What has he done for the "Conservative", (not "Neo-con), movement, in TWO terms in office????

What's so good about bush and gunowners??? The fact HIS atf is canvassing virginia gunowners?? The fact HIS atf stopped importing kits??

C'mon larry. show me yer stuff.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:16:17 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember when there were those here who were just SURE that GW was going to extend the AWB when it got to his desk. Of course, it didn't. But the question is this: who would've been more likely to sign anti-gun legislation into law -- Bush or Kerry? If you REALLY think that it would have been Bush, then you really are wacked. Bush ain't perfect, but regardless of your negative attitudes about him -- he's STILL a million miles from Kerry (open borders, WMD's, and all).

Red, I guess you did not read my original post regarding my personal feelings about Mr Bush and please dont forget that He said he would sign the AWB again..

I'll well aware of what GW "said" he'd do in that instance. But I am also aware of the well-known possibility that he was playing games with the libs to lull them to sleep. The fact is, as Old Painless says... there is a HUGE difference between GW and Kerry and their camps. But if you can't see that, not much I can do about it. I would get your eyes checked before you drive again though...

You are correct in saying its not about what he said he would, its about what he has done. By the way, what has the President done in his 5 yrs to further the Conservative movement ? The Farm bill? The Education Bill? The Energy Bill? Proposing amesty for Illegals?Signing Campaign Finance reform? Liberal trade with China? Aids in Africa? Please tell me?

IOW, he has not done everything exactly as YOU want it, so it is a "liberal" agenda.

Boo hoo.

I list five major Liberal items that the President signed and or supported and you resort to grade school level Boo Hoo's ?? Have a cookie and drink your Kool aid..

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:17:36 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Oh horsepuckey. What liberal agenda? The war in Iraq? If that is your idea of a liberal agenda, I would hate to see what you think conservative is.

I will list some of them for you again if you like, Kennedy's Education bill- ( the largest in history)
Farm Bill- (same as above )
Signing Campaign Finance reform- ( He stated that he believed it to be unconstitionual but signed it anyway)
Liberal trade status for China -( one of our real enemies in the world)
Highway Bill-( largest pork bill in decades )
Wanted to give Illegals amnesty-( has left our borders wide open )
I am sure there is more I have not listed but I would say these items are a pretty good agenda that any hard core liberal would be proud of.

Campaign finance and amnesty, I will grant maybe they are, but I don't buy it on the rest.

Yeah, we don't need education, roads, or farms.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:19:01 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

Kerry, would not have Christians sacrificing themselves on the "Alter of Freedom", Bush has set up in the Middle East.........

To establish an ISLAMIC state...............

Kerry, would NOT have been able to move through the socialist, big government legislation that Bush has.......

Hillary and Bill, are envious of him!!!

(PS. Yes, I told you all so!!!! )

You didn't tell us a damn thing. All you do is rave like a lunatic.

Socialist? Tell me what socialism he has initiated.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:21:23 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Most of the guys I know on this site are very active in politics and that is the point isnt it. I have posted a list of liberal laws and actions that the President and his partners in Congress have approved ( and I am sure I have forgot some ) So far I have seen 2 claims of conservatism on behalf of Mr Bush, 1- He "allowed" the AWB to die and 2 he appointed John Roberts to the Court. He did not allow anything regarding the AWB and even said he would sign it, Judge Roberts is a Phantom appointee at this time , it will take a couple of years to know where he is. Compare those 2 items with the long list of Liberal agenda that Mr Bush has supported and or allowed to pass and it becomes ridiculous. Enjoy your Kool Aid kids...

crowboy: As far as the comment about the guys on this board being politically active, I don't think you can use the word "most" with a straight face. What I perceive from threads I have viewed is that many send in a buck or two when there is some issue out there that may effect our Second Amendment rights, or the presidential race is close, but only a few have the inclination to become active politically and actually work for needed changes. It is a sad state of affairs.

Cry about GWB all you want. Unless there is action taken by individuals of our persuasion to bring about change at all levels of government things will remain the same. If you want to bash GWB go ahead it serves no purpose other than to stir the pot. If you want a change from the way things are to the way things should be get active politically. Me I've got better things to do than to list why I think GWB sold us out . I'm working within the political party of my choice to bring about change.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:21:54 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

Kerry, would not have Christians sacrificing themselves on the "Alter of Freedom", Bush has set up in the Middle East.........

To establish an ISLAMIC state...............

Kerry, would NOT have been able to move through the socialist, big government legislation that Bush has.......

Hillary and Bill, are envious of him!!!

(PS. Yes, I told you all so!!!! )

You didn't tell us a damn thing. All you do is rave like a lunatic.

Socialist? Tell me what socialism he has initiated.

How 'bout, from the time he opened his mouth last night, until he closed it???

Almost ALL socialism........

You got a short memory there larry???

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:22:21 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Oh horsepuckey. What liberal agenda? The war in Iraq? If that is your idea of a liberal agenda, I would hate to see what you think conservative is.

I will list some of them for you again if you like, Kennedy's Education bill- ( the largest in history)
Farm Bill- (same as above )
Signing Campaign Finance reform- ( He stated that he believed it to be unconstitionual but signed it anyway)
Liberal trade status for China -( one of our real enemies in the world)
Highway Bill-( largest pork bill in decades )
Wanted to give Illegals amnesty-( has left our borders wide open )
I am sure there is more I have not listed but I would say these items are a pretty good agenda that any hard core liberal would be proud of.

Campaign finance and amnesty, I will grant maybe they are, but I don't buy it on the rest.

Yeah, we don't need education, roads, or farms.

We dont need things like 150 million dollar bridges to nowhere in Alaska or Farm subsidies to folks who do not need them and if your going to defend public education in this country you have been drinking to much Kool Aid. Oh I forgot the AIDS money to Africa that will end up in the dictators Swiss accounts..

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:23:13 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember when there were those here who were just SURE that GW was going to extend the AWB when it got to his desk. Of course, it didn't. But the question is this: who would've been more likely to sign anti-gun legislation into law -- Bush or Kerry? If you REALLY think that it would have been Bush, then you really are wacked. Bush ain't perfect, but regardless of your negative attitudes about him -- he's STILL a million miles from Kerry (open borders, WMD's, and all).

Red, I guess you did not read my original post regarding my personal feelings about Mr Bush and please dont forget that He said he would sign the AWB again..

I'll well aware of what GW "said" he'd do in that instance. But I am also aware of the well-known possibility that he was playing games with the libs to lull them to sleep. The fact is, as Old Painless says... there is a HUGE difference between GW and Kerry and their camps. But if you can't see that, not much I can do about it. I would get your eyes checked before you drive again though...

You are correct in saying its not about what he said he would, its about what he has done. By the way, what has the President done in his 5 yrs to further the Conservative movement ? The Farm bill? The Education Bill? The Energy Bill? Proposing amesty for Illegals?Signing Campaign Finance reform? Liberal trade with China? Aids in Africa? Please tell me?

IOW, he has not done everything exactly as YOU want it, so it is a "liberal" agenda.

Boo hoo.

I list five major Liberal items that the President signed and or supported and you resort to grade school level Boo Hoo's ?? Have a cookie and drink your Kool aid..

Grade school level is about what is appropriate for the nonsense you have posted. Just because YOU think something is liberal and don't like it, really doesn't make it so nor does it really mean anything.

You call me sophmoric, then you break out the tired worn out "kool aid". I love it, just shows that you apparently cannot have an original thought if you have to invoke that worn-out "liberal" phrase.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:24:42 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Most of the guys I know on this site are very active in politics and that is the point isnt it. I have posted a list of liberal laws and actions that the President and his partners in Congress have approved ( and I am sure I have forgot some ) So far I have seen 2 claims of conservatism on behalf of Mr Bush, 1- He "allowed" the AWB to die and 2 he appointed John Roberts to the Court. He did not allow anything regarding the AWB and even said he would sign it, Judge Roberts is a Phantom appointee at this time , it will take a couple of years to know where he is. Compare those 2 items with the long list of Liberal agenda that Mr Bush has supported and or allowed to pass and it becomes ridiculous. Enjoy your Kool Aid kids...

crowboy: As far as the comment about the guys on this board being politically active, I don't think you can use the word "most" with a straight face. What I perceive from threads I have viewed is that many send in a buck or two when there is some issue out there that may effect our Second Amendment rights, or the presidential race is close, but only a few have the inclination to become active politically and actually work for needed changes. It is a sad state of affairs.

Cry about GWB all you want. Unless there is action taken by individuals of our persuasion to bring about change at all levels of government things will remain the same. If you want to bash GWB go ahead it serves no purpose other than to stir the pot. If you want a change from the way things are to the way things should be get active politically. Me I've got better things to do than to list why I think GWB sold us out . I'm working within the political party of my choice to bring about change.

Goodfor you.

I worked repubs hard for over 12 years. We did the so-called "revolution", in the 90's.........

They're all liars.

There is NO "revolution"!!

It's tweedely-dee & tweedely-dum......

The SAME agenda under both......

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:26:25 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

Kerry, would not have Christians sacrificing themselves on the "Alter of Freedom", Bush has set up in the Middle East.........

To establish an ISLAMIC state...............

Kerry, would NOT have been able to move through the socialist, big government legislation that Bush has.......

Hillary and Bill, are envious of him!!!

(PS. Yes, I told you all so!!!! )

You didn't tell us a damn thing. All you do is rave like a lunatic.

Socialist? Tell me what socialism he has initiated.

How 'bout, from the time he opened his mouth last night, until he closed it???

Almost ALL socialism........

You got a short memory there larry???

Fucking generalities. How about some specifics. Rebuilding a disaster area is socialism???

Some of you are so self-centered, short-sighted, and absolutely selfish, it is really pathetic. If it doesn't benefit you directly, it is:
Socialism
Liberalism

Unbelievable.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:28:17 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Most of the guys I know on this site are very active in politics and that is the point isnt it. I have posted a list of liberal laws and actions that the President and his partners in Congress have approved ( and I am sure I have forgot some ) So far I have seen 2 claims of conservatism on behalf of Mr Bush, 1- He "allowed" the AWB to die and 2 he appointed John Roberts to the Court. He did not allow anything regarding the AWB and even said he would sign it, Judge Roberts is a Phantom appointee at this time , it will take a couple of years to know where he is. Compare those 2 items with the long list of Liberal agenda that Mr Bush has supported and or allowed to pass and it becomes ridiculous. Enjoy your Kool Aid kids...

crowboy: As far as the comment about the guys on this board being politically active, I don't think you can use the word "most" with a straight face. What I perceive from threads I have viewed is that many send in a buck or two when there is some issue out there that may effect our Second Amendment rights, or the presidential race is close, but only a few have the inclination to become active politically and actually work for needed changes. It is a sad state of affairs.

Cry about GWB all you want. Unless there is action taken by individuals of our persuasion to bring about change at all levels of government things will remain the same. If you want to bash GWB go ahead it serves no purpose other than to stir the pot. If you want a change from the way things are to the way things should be get active politically. Me I've got better things to do than to list why I think GWB sold us out . I'm working within the political party of my choice to bring about change.

I said MOST of the guys I KNOW on this board. So why is it bashing when genuine and sincere criticism is voiced? No one yet has offered any explanation or excuse for all the Liberal items this Administration has passed..

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:31:11 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember when there were those here who were just SURE that GW was going to extend the AWB when it got to his desk. Of course, it didn't. But the question is this: who would've been more likely to sign anti-gun legislation into law -- Bush or Kerry? If you REALLY think that it would have been Bush, then you really are wacked. Bush ain't perfect, but regardless of your negative attitudes about him -- he's STILL a million miles from Kerry (open borders, WMD's, and all).

Red, I guess you did not read my original post regarding my personal feelings about Mr Bush and please dont forget that He said he would sign the AWB again..

I'll well aware of what GW "said" he'd do in that instance. But I am also aware of the well-known possibility that he was playing games with the libs to lull them to sleep. The fact is, as Old Painless says... there is a HUGE difference between GW and Kerry and their camps. But if you can't see that, not much I can do about it. I would get your eyes checked before you drive again though...

You are correct in saying its not about what he said he would, its about what he has done. By the way, what has the President done in his 5 yrs to further the Conservative movement ? The Farm bill? The Education Bill? The Energy Bill? Proposing amesty for Illegals?Signing Campaign Finance reform? Liberal trade with China? Aids in Africa? Please tell me?

IOW, he has not done everything exactly as YOU want it, so it is a "liberal" agenda.

Boo hoo.

I list five major Liberal items that the President signed and or supported and you resort to grade school level Boo Hoo's ?? Have a cookie and drink your Kool aid..

Grade school level is about what is appropriate for the nonsense you have posted. Just because YOU think something is liberal and don't like it, really doesn't make it so nor does it really mean anything.

You call me sophmoric, then you break out the tired worn out "kool aid". I love it, just shows that you apparently cannot have an original thought if you have to invoke that worn-out "liberal" phrase.

Please quote me accurately, I do not see the word "sophmoric " in my posts. Please tell me which of the items I have mentioned as liberal that are not?

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:46:07 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

Kerry, would not have Christians sacrificing themselves on the "Alter of Freedom", Bush has set up in the Middle East.........

To establish an ISLAMIC state...............

Kerry, would NOT have been able to move through the socialist, big government legislation that Bush has.......

Hillary and Bill, are envious of him!!!

(PS. Yes, I told you all so!!!! )

You didn't tell us a damn thing. All you do is rave like a lunatic.

Socialist? Tell me what socialism he has initiated.

How 'bout, from the time he opened his mouth last night, until he closed it???

Almost ALL socialism........

You got a short memory there larry???

Fucking generalities. How about some specifics. Rebuilding a disaster area is socialism???

Some of you are so self-centered, short-sighted, and absolutely selfish, it is really pathetic. If it doesn't benefit you directly, it is:
Socialism
Liberalism

Unbelievable.

So ppl. should be FORCED to donate to rebuild a region that should never have developed under sea level, and so near the coast? Dubya last night sounded like a protege of FDR...case closed...

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:49:05 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember when there were those here who were just SURE that GW was going to extend the AWB when it got to his desk. Of course, it didn't. But the question is this: who would've been more likely to sign anti-gun legislation into law -- Bush or Kerry? If you REALLY think that it would have been Bush, then you really are wacked. Bush ain't perfect, but regardless of your negative attitudes about him -- he's STILL a million miles from Kerry (open borders, WMD's, and all).

Red, I guess you did not read my original post regarding my personal feelings about Mr Bush and please dont forget that He said he would sign the AWB again..

I'll well aware of what GW "said" he'd do in that instance. But I am also aware of the well-known possibility that he was playing games with the libs to lull them to sleep. The fact is, as Old Painless says... there is a HUGE difference between GW and Kerry and their camps. But if you can't see that, not much I can do about it. I would get your eyes checked before you drive again though...

You are correct in saying its not about what he said he would, its about what he has done. By the way, what has the President done in his 5 yrs to further the Conservative movement ? The Farm bill? The Education Bill? The Energy Bill? Proposing amesty for Illegals?Signing Campaign Finance reform? Liberal trade with China? Aids in Africa? Please tell me?

IOW, he has not done everything exactly as YOU want it, so it is a "liberal" agenda.

Boo hoo.

I list five major Liberal items that the President signed and or supported and you resort to grade school level Boo Hoo's ?? Have a cookie and drink your Kool aid..

Grade school level is about what is appropriate for the nonsense you have posted. Just because YOU think something is liberal and don't like it, really doesn't make it so nor does it really mean anything.

You call me sophmoric, then you break out the tired worn out "kool aid". I love it, just shows that you apparently cannot have an original thought if you have to invoke that worn-out "liberal" phrase.

Please quote me accurately, I do not see the word "sophmoric " in my posts. Please tell me which of the items I have mentioned as liberal that are not?

Not much on the English language, are we. You brought up "grade school level". That is what sophmoric means. Sheesh.

As I already mentioned, I don't see needed roads, education, or helping the farmers as liberal.

However, since it does not directly benefit YOU, it must be liberal.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:50:36 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

Kerry, would not have Christians sacrificing themselves on the "Alter of Freedom", Bush has set up in the Middle East.........

To establish an ISLAMIC state...............

Kerry, would NOT have been able to move through the socialist, big government legislation that Bush has.......

Hillary and Bill, are envious of him!!!

(PS. Yes, I told you all so!!!! )

You didn't tell us a damn thing. All you do is rave like a lunatic.

Socialist? Tell me what socialism he has initiated.

How 'bout, from the time he opened his mouth last night, until he closed it???

Almost ALL socialism........

You got a short memory there larry???

Fucking generalities. How about some specifics. Rebuilding a disaster area is socialism???

Some of you are so self-centered, short-sighted, and absolutely selfish, it is really pathetic. If it doesn't benefit you directly, it is:
Socialism
Liberalism

Unbelievable.

So ppl. should be FORCED to donate to rebuild a region that should never have developed under sea level, and so near the coast? Dubya last night sounded like a protege of FDR...case closed...

Case Closed??? Because you say so? Just reinforces what I have been saying. The nation is going to rebuild a disaster area. It doesn't benefit YOU directly, thus not satisfying your selfishness. It must be liberal.

Posted: 9/16/2005 2:57:28 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

Kerry, would not have Christians sacrificing themselves on the "Alter of Freedom", Bush has set up in the Middle East.........

To establish an ISLAMIC state...............

Kerry, would NOT have been able to move through the socialist, big government legislation that Bush has.......

Hillary and Bill, are envious of him!!!

(PS. Yes, I told you all so!!!! )

You didn't tell us a damn thing. All you do is rave like a lunatic.

Socialist? Tell me what socialism he has initiated.

How 'bout, from the time he opened his mouth last night, until he closed it???

Almost ALL socialism........

You got a short memory there larry???

Fucking generalities. How about some specifics. Rebuilding a disaster area is socialism???

Some of you are so self-centered, short-sighted, and absolutely selfish, it is really pathetic. If it doesn't benefit you directly, it is:
Socialism
Liberalism

Unbelievable.

President Bush.....

Federal funds will cover the great majority of the costs of repairing public infrastructure in the disaster zone, from roads and bridges to schools and water systems. Communities Will Be Rebuilt Even Better And Stronger Than Before.

The Gulf Coast has some of the most beautiful and historic places in our country, as well as some deep and persistent poverty, rooted in racial discrimination and opportunity denied. Now is the time to rise above this legacy of inequality. As the Gulf Coast rebuilds, evacuees should come home to the place they love with a chance at a better life.
The GO Zone will also make available loans and loan guarantees for small businesses, including minority-owned enterprises, to get them up and running again. It is this entrepreneurship that will create jobs and opportunity and help break the cycle of poverty.

The President Proposed Worker Recovery Accounts To Help Those Who Need Extra Help Finding A Job. These new Worker Recovery Accounts will provide targeted assistance...........

Workers Will Receive Flexible Assistance To Aid In Their Job Search Or To Pay For Retraining. These Accounts, which states will have flexibility to design, will provide up to $5,000 to certain job seekers to allow them to purchase the training or supportive services, such as child care or transportation, they need to get back to work...........

That's just a few, larry......

looks like liberal-socialism, to me..........

Posted: 9/16/2005 3:00:39 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Its unconstitutional to use Federal Tax dollars for disaster relief.

Care to show us where it says that.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Posted: 9/16/2005 3:02:43 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its unconstitutional to use Federal Tax dollars for disaster relief.

Care to show us where it says that.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

You can't use the Constitution here, it means nothing.........

At least, not to bush, and larry............

Posted: 9/16/2005 3:12:12 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

I said MOST of the guys I KNOW on this board. So why is it bashing when genuine and sincere criticism is voiced? No one yet has offered any explanation or excuse for all the Liberal items this Administration has passed..

Okay I get it now. Let me try this:

Oh your right crowboy dat George W. Bush he da devil, He da devil all are problem are his fault. He such a bad man all us'en going to be dragged down to hell cuz of him. Iffi'n we done get rid of GWB all are problem just go away. Lect anybody, anybody be da better dan dat damn liberal Georgie Bush! No one done stop him or we'd all gots to drink da kool aid!

Now that we've all come over to your side I hope you feel better

Posted: 9/16/2005 3:23:42 PM EDT

[#44]

Having opposite parties controlling Congress and the White House has proven the most effective way of slowing down the government spend-a-thon.

Posted: 9/16/2005 3:34:01 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
I shake my head at the things GWB does on a consistant basis. But I'm come to the conclusion that he's just like his dad. He has a good heart, but he just blows it and bends over for the libs and big government. He's confused. But I'd take a "confused" GWB over a very focused Hitlery ANY day of the week.

I miss Ronaldus Reaganus!!! The guy had balls...

Agreed.

Posted: 9/16/2005 3:34:29 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Having opposite parties controlling Congress and the White House has proven the most effective way of slowing down the government spend-a-thon.

Absolutely true, except that means the Dems will either have the White House or Congress.

As much as the current lineup sucks, that's a direction I would rather not go in.

Too bad there isn't a viable third party.

Posted: 9/16/2005 3:56:03 PM EDT

[#47]

I thought of one other good thing President Bush has done: not sign Kyoto. Kerry certainly would have.

Posted: 9/16/2005 4:10:52 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember when there were those here who were just SURE that GW was going to extend the AWB when it got to his desk. Of course, it didn't. But the question is this: who would've been more likely to sign anti-gun legislation into law -- Bush or Kerry? If you REALLY think that it would have been Bush, then you really are wacked. Bush ain't perfect, but regardless of your negative attitudes about him -- he's STILL a million miles from Kerry (open borders, WMD's, and all).

Red, I guess you did not read my original post regarding my personal feelings about Mr Bush and please dont forget that He said he would sign the AWB again..

I'll well aware of what GW "said" he'd do in that instance. But I am also aware of the well-known possibility that he was playing games with the libs to lull them to sleep. The fact is, as Old Painless says... there is a HUGE difference between GW and Kerry and their camps. But if you can't see that, not much I can do about it. I would get your eyes checked before you drive again though...

You are correct in saying its not about what he said he would, its about what he has done. By the way, what has the President done in his 5 yrs to further the Conservative movement ? The Farm bill? The Education Bill? The Energy Bill? Proposing amesty for Illegals?Signing Campaign Finance reform? Liberal trade with China? Aids in Africa? Please tell me?

Well for starters...
1. Bush Tax Cuts
2. Not Giving Nuclear Technology to North Korea
3. Elimination of Estate Tax
4. Not giving classified technology to Chinese Communists who donate to the President's campaign
5. Actually trying to catch Osama Bin Laden, instead of refusing to take him when a country freely offers him to us
6. Supreme Court: John Roberts +1, maybe +2
7. Filing a lawsuit against the University of Michingan and its Law School in order to stop racist quotas that violate the 14th Ammendment. Overruled by the "great" Sandra Day Oconner
8. Killing the AWB
9. Being A commander in chief that our military actually respects
9. Did I mention the Bush Tax cuts?

I take issue with a lot of things GWB says and does. Even so, he is infinitely better than Clinton or any other viable Democratic candidate. Bill Clinton ran a morally corrupt administration that sold out national security to the highest bidder. GWB does not. GWB is not the true conservative that I would like him to be, but he is a step in the right direction.

The economy is starting to heat up, despite what you hear in the MSM. 2005's deficit will be significantly lower than 2004 because of INCREASED TAX REVENUES. If the economy keeps on track, we might break even by 2007. Remember, federal spending DOUBLED under Ronald Reagan.

The MSM is crumbling; the younger generation (which I am part of) is rebelling against the politically correct liberal bullshit that we have been fed our whole lives. This country is moving to the right, and I guarantee you that the next Commander in Chief in '08 will be MORE CONSERVATIVE than GWB. Republican incumbents who are too liberal will be opposed by real conservatives (see Senator Lincoln Chaffee http://tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050523&s=crowley052305 )
Have hope, my fellow conservative marksmen.

Posted: 9/16/2005 4:15:27 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Kinda makes me wish I'd have voted for Kerry.

If you people actually cannot see the difference between Kerry and President Bush, you are hopeless.

+1

Posted: 9/16/2005 4:31:23 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember when there were those here who were just SURE that GW was going to extend the AWB when it got to his desk. Of course, it didn't. But the question is this: who would've been more likely to sign anti-gun legislation into law -- Bush or Kerry? If you REALLY think that it would have been Bush, then you really are wacked. Bush ain't perfect, but regardless of your negative attitudes about him -- he's STILL a million miles from Kerry (open borders, WMD's, and all).

Red, I guess you did not read my original post regarding my personal feelings about Mr Bush and please dont forget that He said he would sign the AWB again..

I'll well aware of what GW "said" he'd do in that instance. But I am also aware of the well-known possibility that he was playing games with the libs to lull them to sleep. The fact is, as Old Painless says... there is a HUGE difference between GW and Kerry and their camps. But if you can't see that, not much I can do about it. I would get your eyes checked before you drive again though...

You are correct in saying its not about what he said he would, its about what he has done. By the way, what has the President done in his 5 yrs to further the Conservative movement ? The Farm bill? The Education Bill? The Energy Bill? Proposing amesty for Illegals?Signing Campaign Finance reform? Liberal trade with China? Aids in Africa? Please tell me?

Well for starters...
1. Bush Tax Cuts
2. Not Giving Nuclear Technology to North Korea
3. Elimination of Estate Tax
4. Not giving classified technology to Chinese Communists who donate to the President's campaign
5. Actually trying to catch Osama Bin Laden, instead of refusing to take him when a country freely offers him to us
6. Supreme Court: John Roberts +1, maybe +2
7. Filing a lawsuit against the University of Michingan and its Law School in order to stop racist quotas that violate the 14th Ammendment. Overruled by the "great" Sandra Day Oconner
8. Killing the AWB
9. Being A commander in chief that our military actually respects
9. Did I mention the Bush Tax cuts?

I take issue with a lot of things GWB says and does. Even so, he is infinitely better than Clinton or any other viable Democratic candidate. Bill Clinton ran a morally corrupt administration that sold out national security to the highest bidder. GWB does not. GWB is not the true conservative that I would like him to be, but he is a step in the right direction.

The economy is starting to heat up, despite what you hear in the MSM. 2005's deficit will be significantly lower than 2004 because of INCREASED TAX REVENUES. If the economy keeps on track, we might break even by 2007. Remember, federal spending DOUBLED under Ronald Reagan.

The MSM is crumbling; the younger generation (which I am part of) is rebelling against the politically correct liberal bullshit that we have been fed our whole lives. This country is moving to the right, and I guarantee you that the next Commander in Chief in '08 will be MORE CONSERVATIVE than GWB. Republican incumbents who are too liberal will be opposed by real conservatives (see Senator Lincoln Chaffee http://tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050523&s=crowley052305 )
Have hope, my fellow conservative marksmen.

I never said I would prefer a Democrat over GWB, I am just fed up with his policies..

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Our "Conservative" President (Page 2 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us