Conservatives agree!  "Compassionate Conservative" = Democrat.  Ta da.

[url=www.washtimes.com/national/20020618-22131005.htm]Check it out.[/url]

Some highlights:

-Mr. Barr, who insisted that "the Bush agenda is basically good," nonetheless said the president's failure even to threaten to veto campaign-finance regulation "was probably the greatest disappointment of the last year and a half."

-Mr. Armey said Mr. Bush was "wrong" to support AmeriCorps. Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican, has called AmeriCorps "one of the biggest boondoggles ever," adding that he was "terribly disappointed" to see Mr. Bush supporting a federal program that pays people to volunteer.

- "When he came to New Hampshire with Ted Kennedy and stood here talking about expanding the federal role in education, he didn't exactly give me a warm and fuzzy feeling," said New Hampshire Republican state Rep. Fran Wendelboe. "Actually, it made me feel a little queasy."

-  "The White House strategy toward conservatives is to treat us as a special-interest group, like blacks, Latinos and women," said Stephen Moore, president of the Club for Growth. "That's a problem, because we're not just another interest group but the very base of the Republican Party."


LOL, I love it.

Imagine that. A politician not sticking by his "principles" and going back on his campaign promises?

I'M STUNNED!!!

His blow to the constitution by not vetoeing campaing finance was more than disapointing.


It's amazing how straight forward he seemed during the election. Nowadays it seems he's trying to play the "moderate" card as much as possible.


And it's getting old.

[url]www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020615.html[/url]



The "American Dream Down Payment Fund" won't provide a damned thing. That money is coming out of your pocket and mine. What a crock of shiite. Why not just throw me out of the house I worked and saved for and give it away to some deserving family with darker skin than mine?

I feel like I have been given the shaft for the past 10 months......if he passes the 1994 AW ban then he will not get my vote.....some say it would be better than the dems.....I just don't see how...he passes every spending bill that comes across his desk. I don't think he knows the word veto.

How dare you vote your conscience?!

"If you don't vote for the lesser of two evils now, you won't have a chance to vote your conscience later."

[url]www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020615.html[/url]
[i]Yet today, while nearly three-quarters of all white Americans own their homes, less than half of all African Americans and Hispanic Americans are homeowners. We must begin to close this homeownership gap by dismantling the barriers that prevent minorities from owning a piece of the American dream. [/i]

[u]Discriminatory & Unfair "Barriers" to Low-Cost Mortgages[/u]:
* No recent prison record.
* Holding a steady job for 2+ years.
* No recent loan defaults.
* No excessive credit card debt.
* Being an American citizen.
* Having a decent amount of money in savings.

Yeah, let's remove these "barriers" so that more  unqualified, unreliable, high-risk po-folks can recieve loans for homes they can't afford and aren't responsible enough to keep.


[i]
The single greatest hurdle to first time homeownership is a high down payment requirement that can put a home out of reach.[/i]

[u]Translation[/u]:
The single greatest hurdle to first time homeownership is [s]a high down payment requirement[/s] actually being able TO AFFORD IT which can put a home out of reach... of people WHO CAN'T AFFORD IT.


[i]
So my administration is proposing the American Dream Down Payment Fund. When a low-income family is qualified to buy a home, but comes up short on the down payment...

<<< SNIP >>>[/i]

... then they CAN'T AFFORD IT!!

Tell them to start a savings account, sock away 1/12 or 1/24 of the downpayment amount each month and come back next year or the year after!! What's the fucking hurry?!?

If they can't even do that - then THEY CAN'T AFFORD THE HOUSE!!!


[i]
...the American Dream Down Payment Fund will help provide the needed funds. We estimate that this fund will open the door to homeownership for 40,000 low-income families annually...[/i]

...WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO KEEP THE HOUSE!!!


More fucking welfare money burned at the altar of the everlasting downtrodden minority.

[b]Fuck'em!! [/b][pissed]

So why encourage anyone to start saving money for anything??

Can't afford a big house with a big yard in a middle-class neighborhood to string a clothesline to hang your three illegitimate kid's clothes??
Rich Old Uncle Sam will gift you $5,000,  $10,000,  $15,000 for a house you can't afford in a neighborhood you don't belong!

Can't afford the utilities for you and your three illegitimate bambinos living in your oversized house that you didn't buy?
Rich Old Uncle Sam will subsidize your utilities all in the name of helping po-folks keep their homes. (don't want Jose or Takeesha going on welfare now do wez?)

Can't afford to feed your fat, lazy, irresponsible ass and your three illegitimate kids living in your air-conditioned-for-free, oversized house that you didn't buy?
Rich Old Uncle Sam will give you food stamps and free school lunches. (don't want your English-As-A-Second-Language gangsta-wannabe kids to go to school hungry, eh Mama?)

Can't afford the childcare costs to have even more kids and keep working full time?
Rich Old Uncle Sam will provide free day-care centers so you can drop off even more of your alcohol-syndrome/crack baby kids that you can't afford to raise on your own. (it's for the children)

Good old Uncle Sam - he's gots some deep pockets FO-SHO!!

[i]{pssst... you know your Uncle Sam's really a "whitey" - shhhhhh... family secret}[/i]



So much for encouraging self-reliance. [puke]

The American Dream is gone. It's been replaced by the American Entitlement.

The sooner gun owning Republicans like I was once switch over to the Libertarian Party the better. I have seen through the Republican's bs and they are not much better than the Democrats. Republicans just like the Democrats will do and vote for just about anything to keep themselves in office.

If I could take my vote back and vote again in the last Presidential election I would have voted for Harry Brown the Libertarian Party. The Libertarian Party is the only party that has a pretty strict platform by which it adheres to. You don't have liberal and religious right wing Libertarians. All you have is Libertarians. Most Republicans do not vote on laws and bills and ask themselves is it Constitutionally legal or not, if this was the case most of the gun laws and other laws would never make it.

It will be interesting in 2004 and if the Republicans vote to continue the 1994 AW whether the NRA and all the Republicans on this board will continue to vote Republican or not.

If you are Republican because of your Christianity views than you are a Republican for the wrong reason. Religion has no place in government other than protecting the rights of all people to worship where and whatever they want to. You can not legislate religious views that must be taught in the home. I myself consider myself a Christian, but I do not believe it has a place in government.

If it does not interfere with life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, or go against the constitution. People in this country should be allowed to do anything they want. Our founding fathers would call for another revolution if they saw how large, intrusive our government has become which the Republicans are just as much to blame.

Just think of all the unconstitutional gun laws there are and think all laws are enforced with the threat of force. In fact all laws are enforced with the threat of physical or financial force.

You have to ask yourself why are you still a Republican and not a Libertarian. If your answers begin with "Well I feel ..." you are just as bad as Democrats who use emotion and how they feel as opposed to what are the facts and whether it is Constitutional or not.

[u]The problem w/ the Democratic party[/u]: Failure to admit human nature (greed), especially its own, which is why the party has bamboozled so many to believe in foolish social engineering schemes that have not, do not, & will not work. Meanwhile, these same "representatives of the [i]proletariat[/i]" get richer than the greedy capitalists that they rally others against.

[u]The problem w/ the Republican party[/u]: Failure to accept that human nature (greed) often corrupts the free-market spirit of competition (innovation/improvement), resulting in those in power wasting time, money, & resources keeping the competition down, or stealing from the shareholders trough (Enron, anyone?), rather than working to improve things in their own backyard.

*****

There's a reason why "In God We Trust" was printed on the national [i]currency[/i].

*****

Anyone still [b]not[/b] USA == old Roman Empire? Al Quaida doesn't need to lift a finger to do harm to this country. All it has to do is sit back & watch things deteriorate internally.

What the hell is wrong with you people? Would you rather have had Al Gore signing the Campaign Finance Reform bill and closing the Homeownership Gap?

I knew that if he got elected he'd compromise with the dems on issues, as that's what he did when he was governor of Texas.  But, he did stick to his campaign points, namely signing the CCW law, which the previous governor would not do.  However, since he was sworn in he's pretty much ditched anything that even remotely resembles a conservative agenda.

I think he's lost, but if he doesn't sign anything resembling the AW ban back into law then I'll vote for him again.  I voted for that pussbag Browne last time.

Remember the Alamo, and God Bless Texas.

Big surprise. I have been saying this for a while now, and many others have been saying it for longing than I have.

I regret voting for Bush in 2000, and he won't get my vote. My reasons? Oh where to start. Here is a quick list:

-Amnesty of Illegals
-Welfare for non-Homeowners
-Education Bill
-Campaign Finance Bill
-No Armed Pilots
-Farm Bill
-Steel Tarriffs
-War on Terrorism

If all Republican gun owners voted Libertarian in the last election, Al Gore would be president today. Thanks, but no thanks.

Let's just think about what Harry Browne would have done about 9/11 if he was elected.

Tick...
Tock...
Tick...
Tock...
Tick...
Tock...
*DING!*

TIME's UP!  The answer is [b]NOTHING![/b]

He even went so far as to say we deserved it.

I voted for that sorry sack of crap, and I'm glad he didn't even show up on the radar screen.

Remember the Alamo, and God Bless Texas.

[i]"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that[b] they can vote themselves largesse* from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, [/b]with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilization has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: [b]From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back again into bondage."[/b][/i]

--  Penned by Professor Alexander Tyler, a Scottish historian, who in 1787 wrote about the fall of the Athenian republic over 2000 years earlier.

Hey [b]g-man[/b], you forget the best one:

[b]"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article in the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on object of benevolence, the money of their constituents." [/b]
~ James Madison, author U.S. Constitution.

I voted for Bush and consider myself a conservative on most issues, but that said...

Bush has me irked lately.  Almost every recent speech (that I've seen) he seems to think he's Churchill or FDR.  We're not in the middle of ww2 - we're not storming beaches, bombing factories, or taking thousands of casualties a day.  We know the 'war' on terrorism is a good cause and that many government organizations like the FBI need a re-org (but when haven't they?), but for god's sake there are other things happening  - what about the economy?  

There are hundreds of thousands of degree holding professionals laid off and working bottom feeder jobs right now (unless they're overqualified, in which case they're unable to get even that much), I'm one of them and I know there are more than a few on this forum.  Post 9/11 Bush's approval rates soared in his response to the attack, so I think he's trying to keep his speeches geared toward that - emphasizing the issue of what he did well 9 months ago rather than dealing with the staggering unemployment rates and the recession.  I know how Daschle and the dems stalled his economic stimulus package a few months back, but isn't that package like giving an AIDS patient a Tylenol?  

Anyone remember the state of the union address after 9/11, where he said there would be no negotiations or compromises with terrorists?  In regards to his response to Israel's situation that hasn't been the case.   He drew a line in the sand with that address, then when things got complicated he just snuck away from it.  

As far as his democratic stances on some issues, I think he's trying not to rock the boat. He knows he barely won the election, so he wants to keep as many dem voters on his side as possible when re-election time rolls around in 2004.   At this rate though, I might prefer another Republican candidate for 2004.

Lets now add $500,000,000 in aid to help Africans with AIDS.  That is MY hard earned money that he is just giving away, hell Clinton couldn't throw money away this fast.

That IS a good one. I won't go into ALL the areas where it applies.

But DEFINITELY here.

By a technicality, I was prevented from voting this past election. Its getting to the point I'm glad that happened.

"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

This is how Communism works jar. Aren't we glad so many of you voted for the "lesser of two evils"??

So what? Sure would have sent a message eh?

There is a Reason George is doing things this way.. He is conservative.

To understand Bush's seemingly left wing policy, you would have to look at Power,Strategy, the Game of Checkers even...

Ben

The Libertarian Party is NOT the answer.

They too would eventually do what Bush is doing now. See my quote of Tyler above.

The Republicans have simply started playing the game the way teh Democrats do - buying votes.

Even if the Libertarians remained true to their principles, they Democrat would buy enuf votes to get rid of the Libertarians.

Bush is making a power play to buy votes, and stay in power.

it is teh SYSTEM that is corrupt.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with teh blood of patriots and tyrants."

-- T. Jefferson

Maybe this will explain it..

Have you ever been in a situation in a corporation while you are the leader.  Have you ever lead in a politically hot environment like all corporations are. You lead by Totallying controlling the Agenda, The timing, The language. You take away any would be competitors ability to steal your show by even beating them to what they wanna say.....
This works, I have been there and done that. You control the flow of everything by thinking faster,smarter and making quicker and better decisions. You take on the roles of not only your own agenda but beating other peoples to their own agenda's and taking on those roles to. It works..

Its nothing but Game theory, Business strategy, Manipulation. It takes the ability to see what your opponents are going to say before they say it and saying it first... So rest assured, there is a method to Bush's seeming Madness..

Ben

Ditto.

WTF?  He is still our guy and I feel a hell of a lot better with our guy in office over their guy.  

Actually, Imbroglios statement is tongue in cheeck.

We may have "our guy" in office, but he's pushing "their guys" agenda.

The very defintion of Pyhrric victory.

I would rather have our "Democrat" over their Democrat.

Well, that may be true.

Still, its a bitter pill to swallow.

i like your descriptions of the parties.

"in god we trust" appeared on the money during the lincoln administration to make the federal cause appear to be sanctioned by the deity.

What are the options?

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

- T. Jefferson

I love T.J. also but give me something to work with.

The dilemma is that while the Republicans are soft on some of the ideals they put in their platform, the Libertarian party platform contains some planks I just can't in good conscience get behind. Since the LP will never get the chance to disassemble the welfare system, opening the borders and legalizing drugs will be a disaster for this country.

The Bush Presidency:

- Not allowing pilots to be armed
- Supporting Arafat
- The Education bill
- Not vetoing CFR
- 2nd Amendment = individual right but we can still take them away
- More gays in gov't
- Not allowing pilots to be armed
- So-called airline security (i.e. no racial profiling)
- More Big Gov't (Homeland Security Agency)

I am very disappointed in the Bush II Presidency.

Merlin

Well, I honestly don;t beleive there is a solution.

The Repubs are now playing the game the way teh Dems do - BUY VOTES.

That means a NEVER ENDING stream of new programs paid for by the taxpayer.

The LP is NOT the answer as if they also play the game the same way, them they are just as bad, and if they don't, the other parties will buy enuf votes to quickly oust them from office.

OK, let me dream a bit:

1. TERM LIMITS. 12 years max in the Senate, 10 in the House.

2. Impeachment for ANY violations of the US Constitution.

These will NEVER happen. Next stop - tree of liberty.

In that case; I still would rather have our "Democrat" over their Democrat.

Mr. Bush is giving me a new sense of what it must be like to be a African-American and a democrat - he  gives lip service to the issues I care about, but basically ignores me, secure in the knowledge that I have no other political home.

Sure, give the left what they want, pander to the soccer moms, make nice nice with the likes of Ted Kennedy, try to win over the “moderates”, but remember this – THEY’RE NEVER GONNA’ PULL THE LEVER FOR BUSH!!!  NEVER!!!

They’ll take everything they can roll him for, then demand more. In the end they’ll spit in his eye, call him a fool, and vote liberal. Think Daschle.

Bush hasn’t lost me yet, but he is well on his way.

Mike

NOW I'm pissed. I am just completing the purchase of my first home, and I had to save and scrimp and sacrifice to get the down payment. I've done without new toys and in some cases put off even basic necessities or desperately neede maintenance on my car, and HATED IT, but did it anyway, because I realize that home ownership requires SACRIFICE and in the long run is worth it.  WHY in the HELL will I now have to pay for someone else's DP, Free of any sacrifice on their part, because they happen to be of a different race or socioeconomic class?

Any of y'all feeling generous? Want to just GIVE me my down payment? At least then you'd know the your money was going to a person who has a better than average shot at making the mortgage payment, instead of some cracked out hobag squirting out an increase in their welfare check every nine months who doesn't have the judgment NOT to get into a situation they can't afford but had rather screw you over to get something they DON'T deserve, HAVEN'T earned and think they're ENTITLED to.
It's a SIMPLE CONCEPT: If you can't afford to make the down payment, YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO BUY THE FVCKING HOUSE.
[pissed][pissed]
PIT

Imbroglio, your post puts a smile on my face.
Thank you.

This second guessing and armchair quarterbacking ignores one salient point:

Private ownership of firearms is still legal at the Federal level.

President and King AL Gore, UN General Secretary and President of the Western World Billy Bubba Clinton, and Imperial Senate Princess Clinton WOULD BE COLLECTING GUNS RIGHT NOW IF THEY COULD!!!!!

It is possible that President Bush was the only person on the planet that could clear out the Clinton/Gore crew. The Clinton/Gore crew was burrowed in Washington like Arkansas ticks on the back of an Arkansas farm dog. We dodged a bullet when Bush won the Presidency and we are lucky to have President Bush. Could he be more conservative? Duh? But for now we must support President Bush and in six years we need to be ready to elect a Reagan Republican.

These sort of ideas will never work and will make the situation they are trying to rectify even worse. Those of us who actually pay our share of taxes (middle class) will foot the bill, and the "gap" will only get wider.
This just goes to show that there are no longer any substantial differences between the two parties anymore, they both suck.

And this, Garandman, is one of the most [i]intelligent[/i] things you've ever posted. [:D]  I wholeheartedly agree.  

Now, how do we fix the system?

The only good Libertarians could get out of a presidential election is advertisement. Sending a message is good, but i'd rather support us Libs in local elections to build up a base of support. Libertarians are shooting to far before their weapon is zeroed.

Just because Harry Browne says stuff you (me too) agree with does'nt mean he'd be a good president. The man lacks an important element...Charisma. Not to mention tact. I'd personally want someone who could whip-n-destroy leftists nonsense like Neal Boortz.-would be fun in the process too. Lets also not forget that Harry broke Libertarian campaign rules. What other rules might he break to acheive presidency even when he shows no respect for his own party (and us Libs)?



Lib -who if president would have destroyed Osama and then brought the troops home with Osama's body.

Another thing that really irks me about 'ol W.

What about Osama?  We went into this war at his insistance that we find bin Laden.  Now, according to some stats I saw the other day, Bush has mentioned his name [b]three[/b] times in the last 4 months.

The Taliban is history, the al Quieda (sp?) is nearly history, and Osama is no longer important.   So why are we still in Afghanistan?

Oh, wait...Afghanistan seems to have some oil in them thar hills.  On top of that, Bush's bestest friend, Vladimir Putin, runs a country that needs oil badly.  Interesting.....

Here's a start...

1. Term limits. 10 years max in the House, 12 years max in the Senate.

2. No pork-barrelling legislation. Every legislative act must stand on its own merits.

3. Congress only allowed to meet and enact legislation one week of every month. AS Andy Rooney said "America collapsed with the invention of the air conditioner. It allowed politicians to stay year round in D.C. and make new stupid laws."

4. All new legislative efforts MUST contain citations as to where the Constitution gives the Fed Gov't the specific "Enumeriated Power" to pass this legislation.

5. A comprehensive Constitutional review of all preceeding legislation. Each piece of legislation not having DIRECT, specifically enumerated authorization within the Constitution shall be immediately voided and defunded.

Admittedly, these would throw the country into a convulsion. But then there's no gentle way to perform open heart surgery.

[i]Politicians[/i] are going to vote for this?  Riiiiight.  Like they're going to vote for Congressional pay-cuts and Blue Cross medical care for themselves.See #1.  That means giving up power.Ditto.AgainWhile I wholeheartedly agree with every single point, the only way this "open-heart surgery" is going to happen is if the populace rises up and threatens to simply rip the legislator's hearts out if they don't.  Ain't gonna happen.  The politicians have the bread-and-circuses bit down perfectly.  

Too bad the Founders didn't write your suggestions into the Constitution.  I think it's way too late now.