View Full Version : Bush is a sellout and a pussy, and no longer has my support!!
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 11:21 AM
With the nomiation of Harriet Miers, Bush has become his father.
He is appointing a moderate ( possibly liberal) to the Supreme Court.
The one thing I used to think about Bush is he made the right decisions even if they were tough and unpopular.
But now he has become like his dad, he has let the left and the liberals pressure him into make pitiful decisions.
Miers is Souter without testicles.
I guess next Bush will raise taxs like his daddy to make the dems happy!
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 11:22 AM
Hell we may soon be pulling out of Iraq too.... Bush has lost his nerve!!
Maybe he can appoint Sheehan to Sec. of Defense, Rumsfield is too contracersial and conservative.
Nickatilynx
10-03-2005, 11:23 AM
Holy shit!!!
Someone pin this thread!
:)
DrGuile
10-03-2005, 11:25 AM
Lol, nice reverse psychology MikeAI
Nice thread to keep the "commies" from pointing out that she's is the biggest Bush cheerleader on the face of the earth...
el pres
10-03-2005, 11:35 AM
Hell has frozen over and a pig just flew past my window.
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 11:36 AM
Lol, nice reverse psychology MikeAI
Nice thread to keep the "commies" from pointing out that she's is the biggest Bush cheerleader on the face of the earth...
The Supreme Court is not about being a cheerleader.
Fuck the Bushs, when its crunch time they all fold. Bush is just like his dad, actually he is worse then his dad - because at least with 41 everyone knew he was not a Conservative and was wishy washy - wanting to "reach out" and get along.
That is why he appointed Souter and RAISED taxs, even after his read my lips speach.
This appointment hurts JEB, someone I think has donea great job in FL, but will NEVER get my vote or money to run for any office again.
Why do Republican's always puss out???
God, I miss Ronald Reagan!!
I don't think you have anything to worry about Mike.
From a CNN profile
Miers, who is single, is known for putting in long hours without complaint. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, a fellow Texan who earlier served alongside Miers in the White House, told Texas Lawyer in 2003 that Miers was "here before dawn and after dusk and on most weekends. No one works harder."
"She never seeks the limelight," Spellings told Business Week. "She's just extremely devoted to the president."
Miers reveals little of her own emotions or ideological persuasions, but has been an enthusiastic supporter of the Bush administration on a broad of initiatives including tax cuts, Social Security reforms, restrictions on federal spending on embryonic stem cell research, national security, education reforms and fighting terrorism.
In hosting an "Ask the White House" interactive forum on the Internet before the 2004 elections, Miers lavished praise on a litany of Bush administration initiatives, then added, "I could go on and on."
She will vote the way Bush wants her to.
JoesHO
10-03-2005, 11:44 AM
been sipping the wine ?
on the one hand I am glad to see you ave came to your sences on the oter hand i think this chick is a bush puppet as well.
what do you base you claims she is a Liberal or moderate on ? any rulings of any significance?
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 11:46 AM
I do not think people understand the concept of the Supreme Court and life time appointments. This is not a cabinent Secretary who will be gone when Bush leaves office in 2008. She will be there until she dies. There is NO check on her opinion, and she certainly won't be calling Bush to see how to vote on court issues.
Guille to think I am trying to dupe the oprano anti-American liberals so they don't bash Bush or myself shows how out of touch with reality YOU are.
I define myself by those who oppose my ideas and philosophy. If you, or the rest of the loones would agree with me on something, then I know instictively that I must be wrong!
sarettah
10-03-2005, 11:46 AM
[QUOTE=JoesHO1what do you base you claims she is a Liberal or moderate on ?[/QUOTE]
SHE's female, so of course she's a liberal.......... :yowsa:
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 11:47 AM
I am not the only one worked up.
http://frum.nationalreview.com/
If Bush hade made this choice before his re-election, he would be just like his dad - unemployed!
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 11:49 AM
Joe, take the time to read up on her.
Sar, there are many outstanding Conservative women I would have eagerly supported. Nice cheap shot.
sarettah
10-03-2005, 11:50 AM
I am not the only one worked up.
http://frum.nationalreview.com/
If Bush hade made this choice before his re-election, he would be just like his dad - unemployed!
From the column Mike References:
--two decades in which a generation of conservative legal intellects of the highest ability
Isn't conservative and intellect an oxymoron ? :huh:
:yowsa:
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 11:52 AM
To be clear for all the narrow thinking Opranauts.
I do not want a justice who is loyal to President Bush. I want a justic who is loyal and faithful to the CONSTITUTION!!!
This is not a personality contest, picking a Supreme Court justice is a lifetime decision.
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 11:57 AM
From the column Mike References:
Isn't conservative and intellect an oxymoron ? :huh:
:yowsa:
Must be such a burden for you to carry such a keen mind Sarattah!! Your intellectual capactiy has served you well. I hope that one day I can achieve what you have with your razor like mind.
:yawn:
OldJeff
10-03-2005, 12:05 PM
Uh
Bush was both of those long before he took office.
Owned by the oil companies, chicken hawk deserter during wartime, and religious right ass kisser.
I am just really surprised it took you this long to figure it out.
Nickatilynx
10-03-2005, 12:07 PM
To be clear for all the narrow thinking Opranauts.
I do not want a justice who is loyal to President Bush. I want a justic who is loyal and faithful to the CONSTITUTION!!!
This is not a personality contest, picking a Supreme Court justice is a lifetime decision.
Not wishing to split hairs , but I thought a Justice interpreted the Constitution?
el pres
10-03-2005, 12:10 PM
The Supreme Court is not about being a cheerleader.
Fuck the Bushs, when its crunch time they all fold. Bush is just like his dad, actually he is worse then his dad - because at least with 41 everyone knew he was not a Conservative and was wishy washy - wanting to "reach out" and get along.
That is why he appointed Souter and RAISED taxs, even after his read my lips speach.
This appointment hurts JEB, someone I think has donea great job in FL, but will NEVER get my vote or money to run for any office again.
Why do Republican's always puss out???
God, I miss Ronald Reagan!!
Does the US work similar to the U.K, there's right and left wing parties,
the only way for them to increase votes is to center themsleves just a bit?
In the US who will the right vote for if not Republican, or will they just not vote, the left have got Ralph Nader, but the right, who've they got, has Ross Peroit still got a party?
Evil Chris
10-03-2005, 12:12 PM
The Bush's have always been especially self-serving politicians.
You're only realizing this now Mike?
Nickatilynx
10-03-2005, 12:15 PM
The Bush's have always been especially self-serving politicians.
You're only realizing this now Mike?
Name a politician that is not self-serving.
sarettah
10-03-2005, 12:20 PM
Must be such a burden for you to carry such a keen mind Sarattah!! Your intellectual capactiy has served you well. I hope that one day I can achieve what you have with your razor like mind.
Keep working and you might get there even with the handicap of being a conservative :okthumb:
ThrobX
10-03-2005, 12:25 PM
My heart bleeds for you, Mike. Looks like you're finally realizing what we all knew for quite awhile: Bush is a tool.
Evil Chris
10-03-2005, 12:26 PM
Name a politician that is not self-serving.I said "especially". ;)
Almighty Colin
10-03-2005, 12:29 PM
I feel like I just walked into an alternate universe
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 12:43 PM
Someone pointed out this nomination is defined by the 2 Cs.
Cronyism and capitulation!
TheEnforcer
10-03-2005, 12:43 PM
To be clear for all the narrow thinking Opranauts.
I do not want a justice who is loyal to President Bush. I want a justic who is loyal and faithful to the CONSTITUTION!!!
This is not a personality contest, picking a Supreme Court justice is a lifetime decision.
You are being just as reactionary as any Dem people on the right rip as being reactionary on issues Mike. You don't have any clue on this woman and what her legal positions are. Why not wait until the committee has time to look into her and see what they come up with?
Don't get me wrong, any time Bush is attacked by his own supporters it's a good thing, but in all fairness why not wait until aftre the judiciary committee has poked, prodded, and peppered her with questions to see what she is like before ripping into her.
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 12:52 PM
TE this is what happens with Supreme Court justices. I seriously doubt this woman is some kind of Scalia/Thomas stealth Conservative. Bush threw this woman up because he is weakened, and has given up the fight.
Supreme Court justices determine the long term legacy of a President. Bush could have made major strides, instead he keeps the status quo.
The American people and the Constitution will lose because of it.
Watch TV, the democrats are stunned - they do not know what to say..... ( I am sure some are laughing their asses off)
Don't get me wrong, any time Bush is attacked by his own supporters it's a good thing, but in all fairness why not wait until aftre the judiciary committee has poked, prodded, and peppered her with questions to see what she is like before ripping into her.
There is no reason to wait. She'll be as evasive with her answers as Roberts was. It's already well documented that she favors Bush's policies and the fact that this is a lifetime position gaurantees that Bush's agenda will go on long after he leaves office.
Take stem cell research as an example. This is one of the most important medical breakthroughs in our lifetime and now, we may have someone on the bench that will vote nay on the issue.
Dravyk
10-03-2005, 12:56 PM
I feel like I just walked into an alternate universeIt's Bizzaro World!! The sky is falling!!
TheEnforcer
10-03-2005, 01:29 PM
TE this is what happens with Supreme Court justices. I seriously doubt this woman is some kind of Scalia/Thomas stealth Conservative. Bush threw this woman up because he is weakened, and has given up the fight.
Supreme Court justices determine the long term legacy of a President. Bush could have made major strides, instead he keeps the status quo.
The American people and the Constitution will lose because of it.
Watch TV, the democrats are stunned - they do not know what to say..... ( I am sure some are laughing their asses off)
I haven't been watching the news yet. Will make sure to check it out. Still think you should wait and see what happens in the hearing before fully passing judgement. I can understand your concern but maybe you will be surprised in the hearings.
TheEnforcer
10-03-2005, 01:37 PM
There is no reason to wait. She'll be as evasive with her answers as Roberts was. It's already well documented that she favors Bush's policies and the fact that this is a lifetime position gaurantees that Bush's agenda will go on long after he leaves office.
Take stem cell research as an example. This is one of the most important medical breakthroughs in our lifetime and now, we may have someone on the bench that will vote nay on the issue.
I know you don't like her. :>)) I'm just talking about Mike, who has supported Bush through thick and thin.
TheEnforcer
10-03-2005, 01:40 PM
I would also point out that if many in his base aren't happy he will do something to make them feel confortable about the pick.
PornoDoggy
10-03-2005, 02:11 PM
Don't know anything about the woman myself - and that's the point of the nomination.
At least one Bushite bobblehead from Congress was just quoted on NPR as saying that her lack of judicial experience is a plus in his mind.
Sounds to me like she is a typical REPUBLICAN nominee, rather than a NeoCon Republicangelical - moderate to conservative on social issues, staunchly pro-business.
I'm trying very hard not to think she is worth supporting just based on Mike's reaction ... :whistling
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 02:15 PM
TE you are a moron, I only support people when the make the right decisions. I have disagreed with Bush on many issues, this one is just the latest and probably most important ( at least in my opinion).
TheEnforcer
10-03-2005, 02:18 PM
TE you are a moron, I only support people when the make the right decisions. I have disagreed with Bush on many issues, this one is just the latest and probably most important ( at least in my opinion).
No, Mike the moron is you. Did I say that you agreed with everything Bush did or said? No, I did not. Supporting someone through thick and thin doesn't mean you agree with them on everything. You've stood by Bush as a good president even when you disagreed with him on some issues. That you can't note that difference says more about you than it ever does me.
TheEnforcer
10-03-2005, 02:21 PM
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/03/D8D0MMQG0.html
Miers Led Bid to Revisit Abortion Stance
Oct 03 1:33 PM US/Eastern
By ANNE GEARAN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON
President Bush's choice to fill the seat of retiring Supreme Court Justice and moderate abortion rights supporter Sandra Day O'Connor was a leader in an unsuccessful fight to get the nation's largest lawyers' group to reconsider its pro-abortion rights stance.
As president of the Texas State Bar in 1993, Harriet Miers urged the national American Bar Association to put the abortion issue to a referendum of the group's full membership. She questioned at the time whether the ABA should "be trying to speak for the entire legal community" on an issue that she said "has brought on tremendous divisiveness" within the ABA.
Miers was among a group of lawyers from the Texas bar and elsewhere who had argued that the ABA should have a neutral stance on abortion.
The ABA's policy-making body overwhelmingly rejected the Texas lawyers' group's 1993 proposal to put the issue to a referendum by mail of the ABA's then-roster of about 360,000 members.
"Our current position (in favor of abortion rights) has no meaning unless it is endorsed in fact by the membership," Miers said at the time.
The ABA's position, adopted in 1992, endorses the basic outlines of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling that women may choose to have an abortion without state interference prior to the point at which a fetus could live outside the womb, and after that point if the woman's life or health were threatened by the pregnancy.
Although Miers' personal view of abortion was not explicit in 1993, Leonard Leo, a White House adviser on Supreme Court nominations highlighted her efforts as part of the reason that "conservatives should be very happy with this selection."
"As a leader of the bar, Harriet Miers was a fearless and very strong proponent of conservative legal views. She led a campaign to have the American Bar Association end its practice of supporting abortion-on- demand and taxpayer-funded abortions," Leo said a memo on the Miers nomination.
Miers was very active in the ABA, and senators will probably question Miers about deep divisions within the organization about the abortion question and the ABA's role in taking policy positions.
The ABA briefly held the neutral position Miers and others supported _ from 1990 to 1992.
===================================
See, now maybe she isn't as bad as you may think...... Granted it's only one issue but one that is important to many conservatives (though not necessarily to you). Again, all I am saying is that she may not be as bad as you think. Wait until you see what happens when someone like Senator Brownback from Kansas grills her.
Dravyk
10-03-2005, 02:21 PM
Don't know anything about the woman myselfFrom CNN ...
President Bush has chosen White House counsel Harriet Miers as his nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Career: White House counsel, 2004-present; White House deputy chief of staff for policy, 2003-2004; White House staff secretary, 2001-2003; Texas Lottery Commission chairwoman, 1995-2000; attorney in private practice, Locke Liddell & Sapp in Dallas, Texas, 1972-1999; Dallas City Council member, 1989-1991
Education: Bachelor of science degree in mathematics, 1967, Southern Methodist University, Dallas; law degree, 1970, Southern Methodist University School of Law
Born: 1945 in Dallas
Family: Single, no children
Sources: White House, FindLaw, AP
Nickatilynx
10-03-2005, 02:22 PM
From CNN ...
President Bush has chosen White House counsel Harriet Miers as his nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Career: White House counsel, 2004-present; White House deputy chief of staff for policy, 2003-2004; White House staff secretary, 2001-2003; Texas Lottery Commission chairwoman, 1995-2000; attorney in private practice, Locke Liddell & Sapp in Dallas, Texas, 1972-1999; Dallas City Council member, 1989-1991
Education: Bachelor of science degree in mathematics, 1967, Southern Methodist University, Dallas; law degree, 1970, Southern Methodist University School of Law
Born: 1945 in Dallas
Family: Single, no children
Sources: White House, FindLaw, AP
Is she a lesbian?
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 02:24 PM
Is she a lesbian?
Well I did see her in a photo with the same "Captain" outfit Lee Noga had on a few years ago in Florida.
Dravyk
10-03-2005, 02:25 PM
Is she a lesbian?I believe she's a Methodist. http://oprano.com/msgboard/images/smilies/smile.gif
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 05:42 PM
What is depressing here is not what the nomination tells us of her, but what it tells us of the president who appointed her. For in selecting her, Bush capitulated to the diversity-mongers, used a critical Supreme Court seat to reward a crony, and revealed that he lacks the desire to engage the Senate in fierce combat to carry out his now-suspect commitment to remake the court in the image of Scalia and Thomas. In picking her, Bush ran from a fight. The conservative movement has been had -- and not for the first time by a president by the name of Bush.
selena
10-03-2005, 05:45 PM
what do you base you claims she is a Liberal or moderate on ? any rulings of any significance?
There are no rulings, significant or otherwise. She's never been a judge.
sarettah
10-03-2005, 06:05 PM
What is depressing here is not what the nomination tells us of her, but what it tells us of the president who appointed her. For in selecting her, Bush capitulated to the diversity-mongers, used a critical Supreme Court seat to reward a crony, and revealed that he lacks the desire to engage the Senate in fierce combat to carry out his now-suspect commitment to remake the court in the image of Scalia and Thomas. In picking her, Bush ran from a fight. The conservative movement has been had -- and not for the first time by a president by the name of Bush.
What is depressing here is not what the nomination tells us of her, but what it tells us of the president who appointed her. For in selecting her, Bush capitulated to the diversity-mongers, used a critical Supreme Court seat to reward a crony, and revealed that he lacks the desire to engage the Senate in fierce combat to carry out his now-suspect commitment to remake the court in the image of Scalia and Thomas. In picking her, Bush ran from a fight. The conservative movement has been had -- and not for the first time by a president by the name of Bush.
Nice cut and paste from Buchanan's column there Mikey. :okthumb:
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=9444
TheEnforcer
10-03-2005, 06:11 PM
What is depressing here is not what the nomination tells us of her, but what it tells us of the president who appointed her. For in selecting her, Bush capitulated to the diversity-mongers, used a critical Supreme Court seat to reward a crony, and revealed that he lacks the desire to engage the Senate in fierce combat to carry out his now-suspect commitment to remake the court in the image of Scalia and Thomas. In picking her, Bush ran from a fight. The conservative movement has been had -- and not for the first time by a president by the name of Bush.
I do understand your frustration Mike but given that she doesn't have a paper trail you can't say for certain she won't be a good judge in your eyes when all is said and done. Look at one of the pet causes that conservatives (again, not necessarily your casue but definately a conservative one) are very, very adamant about like abortion. That article shows that she is very likely to vote as conservatives want on the issue when it comes up. Because she's his personal lawyer Bush may know her positions on isses better than anyone else and knows down the road she'll be a reliably conservative judge but also someone that won't have a hard time getting through the confirmation process. I had no problem with the senate confirming chief judge Roberts and my two dem senators voted for him. Maybe this woman won't be as bad as you think.
Nice cut and paste from Buchanan's column there Mikey. :okthumb:
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=9444
:burn:
Grump
10-03-2005, 06:40 PM
I'm still trying to get past this sentence:
"The one thing I used to think about Bush is he made the right decisions..."
ROFL!!!!!!
I think that perhaps in some cases the term conservative is being misused here. A political conservative is one thing, a conservative Supreme Court is something else entirely.
A conservative Supreme Court is one that tends to rely on precedent to define its rulings. It really has little to do with the political leanings of the members on the court.
A liberal court, on the other hand, tends to create "new" law with its rulings. A liberal court would be more likely to decide that something like the Miller test or Roe v Wade was a bad precedent and want to overturn those rulings.
Just thought I'd bring up this point.
Winetalk.com
10-03-2005, 07:05 PM
A liberal court would be more likely to decide that something like the Miller test or Roe v Wade was a bad precedent and want to overturn those rulings.
I want the same drugs she is getting!
Nickatilynx
10-03-2005, 07:15 PM
I want the same drugs she is getting!
I'll have some oral contraceptives and tylenol fedexed to you immediately :)
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 07:19 PM
:burn:
Gosh you Einstein's caught me redhanded trying to pass off Pat's column as mine!!
You guys are regular Sherlock Holmes!
Dravyk
10-03-2005, 07:27 PM
Mike so wanted to be a Watergate burgler. :happy45:
Gosh you Einstein's caught me redhanded trying to pass off Pat's column as mine!!
You guys are regular Sherlock Holmes!
Erm.. no, I didn't Sarettah did. I thought it was a good burn so I posted it as such. What's wrong Mike - is you're money belt too tight?
PornoDoggy
10-03-2005, 08:01 PM
I think that perhaps in some cases the term conservative is being misused here. A political conservative is one thing, a conservative Supreme Court is something else entirely.
A conservative Supreme Court is one that tends to rely on precedent to define its rulings. It really has little to do with the political leanings of the members on the court.
A liberal court, on the other hand, tends to create "new" law with its rulings. A liberal court would be more likely to decide that something like the Miller test or Roe v Wade was a bad precedent and want to overturn those rulings.
Just thought I'd bring up this point.
Bullshit.
NOTHING would please many conservative jurists than the opportunity to overturn precedents such as Gideon, Sullivan, and Miranda. There's even some that would welcome a return to Plessy from the "excesses" of Brown v Board of Education.
The arguement over stone tablets or living document has been going on since the time of Andrew Jackson; the only reason the level of debate is so shrill today is that the so-called mainstream right is much further right than it was 20-30 years ago.
The reason that many on the right have their panties in a knot is that the two Bush appointees have THE APPEARANCE of being traditional Republicans, and traditional Republicans are far too moderate on social issues for the knucke-dragging neocons and cross-clutching Republicangelicals. They will strike a moderate course on social issues that will equally piss off Orin Hatch and Ted Kennedy (not really a bad way of finding the right course, maybe); meanwhile, the rights of capital and corporate "citizens" will trump the individual almost every time.
Mike AI
10-03-2005, 08:30 PM
It is amusing to see the peopel coming to spin this choice. Bush could be a genuis and this woman could be the ultimate stealth conservative. But with the track record Repblicans have in being duped ( 7 of hte 9 judges were picked by Republican President's), I think Bush should have picked someone who clearly holds a strict Constructionalist pedergree.
sarettah
10-03-2005, 08:42 PM
Gosh you Einstein's caught me redhanded trying to pass off Pat's column as mine!!
You guys are regular Sherlock Holmes!
And if anyone else had done that you would have been all over their ass.
Just so happened I had the Buchanan column open and was reading it just before I read your post.
Dravyk
10-03-2005, 08:51 PM
It is amusing to see the peopel coming to spin this choice. Bush could be a genuis and this woman could be the ultimate stealth conservative. But with the track record Repblicans have in being duped ( 7 of hte 9 judges were picked by Republican President's), I think Bush should have picked someone who clearly holds a strict Constructionalist pedergree.Any pedigree would have been something.
nickdark
10-03-2005, 10:43 PM
.peopel .... genuis ..Repblicans ... pedergree.
Jesus H ..and you are casting aspersions on peoples intelligence and calling them morons..???
Didnt you drop out of law school ?
pedergree is my favourite ;)
Dravyk
10-04-2005, 01:11 AM
Jesus H ..and you are casting aspersions on peoples intelligence and calling them morons..???
Didnt you drop out of law school ?
pedergree is my favourite http://oprano.com/msgboard/images/smilies/wink.gifLMAO!!
You should come around more often, Nick. Enjoy your posts! http://oprano.com/msgboard/images/smilies/ok.gif
sextoyking
10-04-2005, 01:49 AM
Mike,
Just read your posts. What can I say.... Me and you and others have had our political battles in the past, while I always look for a good battle - I am not sure what to think about this nominee right now. Most Dems are being cautios - want to see the SLIM paper trail that she has. Sure Sen. Reid came out with some love but that doesn't satisfy me. Pat. Buch. was Livid over this - been watching the political shows all eve..
What I really hate is that all nominees now play the Ginsburg game, answer as few questions as you can to get confirmed.. I don't support that on either side of the coin.
While I might be so so ok with this nominee - don't be so quick to think Bush did a Bush#1 on you and the republicans.. He might have waiverd a bit - his #'s are down, katrina, etc, etc but I think he got what he wanted.
I hope Senators grill her like there is no tomorow when the hearings come.. I god dang hate NO PAPER TRAIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is an appt. for LIFE, and I want to know as much about a potential justice as I can.... Damm Mike, such is politics in 2005 :(
Lame Duck status is already starting or forsure in a few more months. Some righties are already starting to slowly walk away / stand up against bush, you can see the writing on the wall.. Will the majority party pay in the mid terms? will it be 1994 again? I dunno - but I will forsure tell you - this next election cycle is sure to be interesting.
Oh, and will bush get lucky with a #3 justice before 2009?? John Paul Stevens is getting up there - that I truly worry about Mike......
Peace
Todd
Torone
10-04-2005, 09:48 AM
The Supreme Court is not about being a cheerleader.
Fuck the Bushs, when its crunch time they all fold. Bush is just like his dad, actually he is worse then his dad - because at least with 41 everyone knew he was not a Conservative and was wishy washy - wanting to "reach out" and get along.
That is why he appointed Souter and RAISED taxs, even after his read my lips speach.
This appointment hurts JEB, someone I think has donea great job in FL, but will NEVER get my vote or money to run for any office again.
Why do Republican's always puss out???
God, I miss Ronald Reagan!!
Mike,
I feel compelled to point out that Reagan was, at one time, a Democrat, also. He saw the light. Perhaps Ms. Meirs has, also. I certainly hope so. If she and Roberts ARE actually Conservative, Maybe they will start disassembling the Liberal/Communist power structure that has been built up over the past 40-50 years...
OldJeff
10-04-2005, 10:01 AM
Mike,
I feel compelled to point out that Reagan was, at one time, a Democrat, also. He saw the light. Perhaps Ms. Meirs has, also. I certainly hope so. If she and Roberts ARE actually Conservative, Maybe they will start disassembling the Liberal/Communist power structure that has been built up over the past 40-50 years...
Not to mention womans reproductive rights, freedom of speech, and that pesky Brown vs Board Of Ed Ruling.
Politicians are, well, politicians...
Bush has broken or diverged from almost every major campaign promise he made (save tax cuts).
smaller federal governement
no nation building
less spending
etc.
It goes for all parties.
The best to hope for is a better balance of power between them.
Not to mention womans reproductive rights, freedom of speech, and that pesky Brown vs Board Of Ed Ruling.
"womans reproductive rights"
haha. ok.
gold4dinar
10-04-2005, 09:33 PM
http://www.borowitzreport.com/
BUSH EMBARKS ON CROSS-COUNTRY MOTORCADE TO PROMOTE LESS DRIVING 200-Vehicle Convoy to Send Message of Conservation, President Says Hoping to send a powerful message about energy conservation, President George W. Bush said today that he would embark on an historic cross-country motorcade to promote less driving.
“The time has come for the American people to wean themselves from their dependence on foreign oil, and I intend to get behind the wheel myself to send that message,” Mr. Bush told reporters at the White House today.
Taking a hands-on role in the symbolic odyssey, Mr. Bush said that he would pilot the lead car in the motorcade, a Ford F250 pickup that he uses to drive around his ranch in Crawford, Texas.
The president said that he personally ordered a ranch hand to drive the pickup truck from Crawford to Washington, D.C. so that Mr. Bush would have it in time for the historic journey.
Mr. Bush added that in the event a national security emergency should require him to leave his energy conservation tour before it is complete, Air Force One will hover over the motorcade at all times, refueling in midair.
While some skeptics wondered whether Mr. Bush’s cross-country trek would succeed in convincing Americans to drive less, it has already inspired one citizen to do so, as Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex) today volunteered to cancel his trip to Texas to stand trial on conspiracy charges.
“I asked myself, ‘Is this trip necessary?’ and I decided it wasn’t,” Rep. DeLay said.
Elsewhere, First Lady Laura Bush said she would appear on “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” while Vice President Dick Cheney said he would appear on “Lost.”
PornoDoggy
10-04-2005, 11:34 PM
"womans reproductive rights"
haha. ok.
Not sure what you find so funny about that ... this is a President who has shown a willingness (maybe for political expedeincy, maybe for idealogical reasons) to defer to the Catholic Church on many items related to birth control.
Maybe you don't consider it an issue because you don't have a uterus, but it's a pretty damned important issue to a hell of a lot of people.
Not sure what you find so funny about that ... this is a President who has shown a willingness (maybe for political expedeincy, maybe for idealogical reasons) to defer to the Catholic Church on many items related to birth control.
Maybe you don't consider it an issue because you don't have a uterus, but it's a pretty damned important issue to a hell of a lot of people.
maybe i understand that "reproductive rights" has nothing to do with abortion, condoms or the Catholic Church. anyone is free to make a kid. that pisses me off!
:wnw:
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.