Since listing all of GWB's real and imagined foibles and traitorous acts seems to appeal to you enough that you actually think he is a bigger enemy than Gore/Hillary/Dean, let's hear what your response is to his "middle finger" to France, Germany, et al by denying them contracts to rebuild Iraq. Seems that if he were just following in the footsteps of "daddy" and selling-out this country to the UN, foreigners, etc; then he's sure got a funny way of showing it.

You can argue about some of his domestic agenda and acts so far, but this Texan seems to love pissing-off all the One World/Global Village/United Nations idiots out there. And for that, I really like him. He isn't perfect, and I may not agree with everything he does -- just like you and I wouldn't agree on everything. But you can't tell me that Gore and the other pinkos wouldn't have already sold-out everything our troops have fought died for in Iraq and Afganistan. Of course, rather than have the balls to go over there, we'd have invited the "UN Peacekeepers" inside our own borders to police American citizens and hand them over to the World Court for being anti-One World.

Whether Bush is wrong in your eyes or not, he's got more balls than Gore or Dean ever had, and more than Hillary even envies...

[rofl]

[img]http://www.georgewbush.com/images/downloads/GWB_logo_350.gif[/img]

I don't hate Bush.

But other than Monica, Bush is VERY Clintonian.

[list]BIGGEST (non-military) spending increase in US history (prescrip drugs)

Supports Clintons gun bans

Gutted the first amendment with McCain Feingold (a despicable act not even Clinton accomplished)

Tolerates fiat from the bench and activist judges

Passed what WILL, in a CLintons hands, be the biggest invasion of privacy and freedom in Us history (Patriot Act)[/list]

NO, there is NOTHING legitimately better than Bush.

[b]BUT NO NOT CHASTISE ME FOR CITING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, OR QUESTIONING WHETHER VOTING FOR HIM IS GOOD FOR AMERICA[/b]

[rolleyes]

[red]Blasting me for telling the truth about Bush doesn't change the truth about Bush.[/red]

No chastisment here garandman. You are correct in your critical thought. But you said the MAGIC WORDS too -- "NO, there is NOTHING legitimately better than Bush." You did NOT say that voting for NOBODY, or A NOBODY, or Dean/Hillary/Gore was EXACTLY THE SAME as voting for Bush. I voted for Bush, and I assure you that no one could have made me check Gore at the ballot box -- nor could they make me check a Dem in the next election.

I guess that's teh question rolling around in my head.

If Bush doesn't get elected, and Dean does, perhaps that hastens "the day"...

...and then I will NOT be too old to do something about it.

A war IS coming. The only question is "Will I be too old to do anything about it?"


Now don't take this the wrong way, cuz its gonna sting a bit...

This "Vote for Bush cuz he ain't Dean" mentality is the same logic (I envision) the Tories used in Patrick Henry's day. "Sure the Brits (Bush is) are bad, and violate the fundamental principles of freedom (supports AWB, McCain Feingold, taxes without representation via prescrip drugs, etc), but they aren't THAT bad (Dean would do MUCH worse) , and there are things worse than the Brits (Gore), and if we oppose the Brits, there will be war(Dean will win)...."

I say "Let the war begin." Before I am too old to effectively defend the freedom the FF entrusted to my care. I'm thirty seven years old, so that may be a more pending reality for me than some others.

My response to his giving France et al the finger would be that it's the right thing to do, but how long until he caves on that?

Yes, I'm happy with some things Bush does. By sheer chance any slimebag politician will eventually do something that those who generally oppose them agree with. Rather like the infinite monkies with infinite typewriters theory. Hell even Clinton did a thing or two I agree with. Would I ever have voted for him? No.

I like Bush the man. I think he's a decent guy really. But Bush the President is something of a disappointment.

And more than anything I'm so sick and tired of being able to muster no better defense than "Well, it could be worse. Just imagine if Gore was in office!" because yes, that would no doubt suck, but come on. How pathetic is your candidate when his only merit is based on "it could be worse"? I'm tired of voting for any given candidate to slow the erosion of our country.  Analogous to bailing water on the Titanic. Is that REALLY supposed to motivate me?

I'm voting for Sharpton in the primaries, mostly because if he actually got nominated he'd sink faster than the Edmund Fitzgerald, but in a way I'd almost like to see him win the general election too because then MAYBE someone somewhere would think to run a candidate that actually inspires people rather than someone who is the lesser of two evils. There HAS to be someone better than the lesser of two evils.


Cpt. Redleg

Red Label,

He probably won't back down against the fregerrus, his buddies have the contracts now.



Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death

Patrick Henry
March 23, 1775

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the house. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the house is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at the truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the numbers of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received?

Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlement assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation.

There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free--if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength but irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extentuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

thedave -

It ALWAYS gives me chills read Ptrick Henry's empassioned address. Their eloquence, fiery conviction, and commitment to the fundamentals of freedom should be SHOUTED from the rooftops.

Seems scarily appropriate for today. "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, so as to (choose the lesser of two evils)???"

I'd have to agree that if this slowly whittling away happens then the future of this country is going to turn into a very unfree society.  So unless something big happens fast, then I don't think this country has a chance of maintaining freedom.  Slowly our weapons will be taken away just like in England, Australia, etc.

The sad thing is that the time to realize it is now, and half the country is buying the BS.

Good points guys.

I have seen the light. I have been an apologist for Bush. No longer. Now, I will simply state that "I LIKE GEORGE W. BUSH". No "it could be worse" or "he's the lesser of the evils". I am voting for him in '04 (unless he goes anti-gun on me). We can all agree to disagree. Some of you say that you are against him because he's AGAINST 2nd Ammendment rights. Well, I am for him because he's FOR 2nd Ammendment rights. I may be proven to be wrong eventually, but for now I am going to continue hitching my horse to the Bush wagon.

Edited to add:

Again, no apologies here, I don't think he is perfect. But I can respect him as a man. Klinton was scum to me.

I can respect that .  ALOT.

Kinda where I am. Presently I'm crafting a letter recapping these points in this thread, to send to ALL my Republican legislators. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Local, state, federal. As well as teh RNC Chairman, John Ashcroft and president Bush.

The LAST chance he has to get my vote is re: the AWB. If he ALLOWS it to be renewed, in fact if he doesn't DECIDEDLY speak against it, its over.

Red_Label,

no apology is necessary, I can respect your stand. And Klinton is scum of the lowest order.

dave

I received a wonderful Christmas card from George and Laura this year.

[:P]