The Conservative Case Against George W. Bush

Discussion in 'Politics' started by tpahl, Aug 4, 2004.

  1. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    An excellent story in the NY Press that sums up what alot of conservatives I know feel about George Bush. unfortunately not all of them come up with the conclusion that the author in this article does.

    http://www.nypress.com/17/31/news&columns/WilliamBryk.cfm

    You can help him be defeated but still not vote for Kerry. Badnarik is a perfect choice for disgruntled republicans upset with their parties support of Bush. It sends a strong message to the nation and the GOP that you will not stand by while they act like liberals.

    Travis
     
  2. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Interesting that the author of that piece does not include the disclaimer that he too is running for President as a write in candidate for The Federalist Party. http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com/prespage.htm

    It seems to be a good idea if you are trying to make a point or throw all sorts of accusations about, you be more upfront than those that release their tax returns? :rolleyes:
     
  3. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    Probably because he is not running according to http://www.vote-smart.org/election_president_party.php?party_name=All which is a much better website to find the current candidates. And even when he was considered a write in candidate, it may not have been with his blessing.

    Do you have any comments about the actual article?

    Travis
     
  4. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I have a problem with taking any source seriously, when I have no idea of what is being preached. See it's different with YOU, I know where you are coming from or myself or Insein or any regular posters. I have no problem arguing or agreeing with your opinions. We all know are slants/biases/etc. But, when you throw out a link and say-here, agree with me or argue with me. Dang, I want to know where THAT person is coming from.

    In the other thread you posted on, regarding the Kerry boring us to death, I stated there that I thought reading the candidates speeches was something that should be practiced more widely. It's related to what I'm saying above.
     
  5. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    So we should abandon Bush and vote for Badnarik and throw the election to Kerry, who is an ultra-liberal and will be worse for the country than Bush, and this is supposed to advance liberty? :cuckoo:
     
  6. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    A lot of Bush supporters are not all that conservative. He has a broad base. I can accept his occasional drifts.
     
  7. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    Kerry may be ultra liberal, but Bush is close to it as well. Looking at Bushs record, he is not a conservative. The choice between Bush and Kerry is a choice between liberal and liberal.

    Voting for Badnarik may swing it to Kerrys favor and you may find that slightly worse, but in 4 years from now the republicans will not put up a liberal as their candidate again. In the long run we would be better off.

    Travis
     
  8. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    Occasional? EVERY year his spending has grown. I would say if anything he has an occasional drift to conservatism.

    Travis
     
  9. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    And some of us want to do all that is possible that we're all HERE in 4 years to argue again. That is the point. Many of us, that may have shared more of your ideas prior to 9/11, now have different priorities. Isolationism is NOT going to solve the problem, neither will attempts at appeasement, however they are presented.
     
  10. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    I don't care about spending that bailed us out of a finacial and security crisis. Has the full econimic damage of 9/11 on the entire country ever been assessed?
     

Share This Page