I see several anti-Bush ppl here..

[Justin Moore]

Tamara,

I'm glad you brought up the 'circular logic' point again. Its an argument that I've been making to several of my friends recently, and I think I managed to actually wake them up.

seeker:

Well stated

 

[Lone_Gunman]

carpettbaggerr,

Consider these things that Bush has done, and explain to me how these things are part of a conservative Republican agenda:

1. The largest expansion of Medicare (ie, the drug bill), since its inception.

2. Campaign Finance Reform, which Bush thought was unconstitutional, signed anyway, and now limits the first amendment.

3. The Education pork bill, supported by Ted Kennedy.

4. The immigration policy change (ie, "its not amnesty")

5. Patriot Act, giving the federal government broader powers to invade privacy without need for a court order.

6. Support for the AWB renewal.

Do you really think Ronald Reagan would have supported any of these things?

Do you really think any of them reflect a conservative philosophy.

Carpettbaggerr, I have never voted for anyone but a republican for federal office. However, over the years the Republican party has moved increasingly to the left. It has become increasingly "big government". This change has sped up under Bush II.

It is hard to break the habit of being a republican, and automatically casting votes in their favor, without thinking about what they really stand for anymore. A vote for Bush today is simply not the same as a vote for Reagan in 1980.

I won't be voting for Bush, and I sure as heck won't be voting for Dean or a Democrat. The libertarians, or some other third party, will get my vote.

I realize that this may let a Democrat get elected, but it won't be my fault if that happens, it will be the Republicans fault for letting their party shift from where their voter base is.

 

[Leatherneck]

I too am a disillusioned Bush supporter. While I applaud his cojones in the WOT, I think he's really just a puppet dancing on strings he's supposed to be controlling!

Maybe I'll start a thread on "Who are the best alternatives and what are their platforms?" I gotte tell ya' that Leatherness and I have seen a couple of Lyndon LaRouche ads on TV the last couple of nights and each one occasioned a mutual roll-of-the-eyes.

TC
TFL Survivor

 

[carpettbaggerr]

So, uh, you vote for candidates you don't agree with because all the popular kids are doing it and you don't want to be on the losing team?

Where did you get that idea? The problem is that there is almost no chance of anyone except the two major candidates winning. So either you vote for the one who's closest to your ideals, or you throw your vote away. That's what you're doing if you vote for the Libertarian candidate, or any other minor party candidate. If you want to do that, I have no problem with it, just remember it may well get the other major party candidate elected.

Bush isn't ideal, and he's done many things I disagree with. He certainly isn't Reagan. But I am absolutely certain the Democratic candidate would be worse. Especially regarding RKBA. I'm sure Al Gore would be fighting very hard to renew the AWB. And a difference of a few hundred votes would have made the difference.

I was on the losing team both times when Clinton won. And I can't count the number of times I've lost in the Congressional elections. But I'm not going to pretend there's any chance of a minor party candidate getting elected. I'd rather choose the lesser of two evils than get the greater one.

 

[longeyes]

There is one salvation for this country right now: GRIDLOCK.

Keep a GOP Congress and put a Dem into the White House. Going the way we are going now, with Bush driving the national engine like Mr. Toad, we are headed for huge and mounting trouble.

I back Bush in '00 and until recently. He's lost me. I'll take my chances with a pathetic dwarf in the White House instead of an unfriendly giant.

 

[Joe Demko]

Going the way we are going now, with Bush driving the national engine like Mr. Toad, we are headed for huge and mounting trouble.

What a vivid and appropriate image. Kudos on a very nice turn of phrase.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

carpetbaggerr,

go look back at the 6 Bush policies I have posted, and explain why they would be anyworse if a Democrat had been in office?

In fact, if a Democrat had been in office, we probably would not have any of them, because of political infighting between a Democrat President and a republican Congress.

 

[Bill Hook]

I'll add my name to the anti-Bush list after the immigation boondoggle.

Forgot about giving drugs to oldsters. Double plus

 

[Jonesy9]

I don't know that it's a huge miscalculation. The GOP dwarfs the DNC in collecting individual contributions (www.opensecrets.com).

Bush and Cheney have no problem defiling the Constitution for political power. They know that a vast majority of the electorate has no clue about CFR and they also know that most of the GOP will go along with them. They can also pass the buck easily to the courts for more cover. Win/win.

 

[ojibweindian]

Until just recently, my parents were Bush supporters. However, the prescription drug thing and the change in immigration policy, in addition to my educating them on the Libertarian Party, has provided the impetus needed for them to change their minds. They will no longer vote "Shrub" in '04.

In 2002, the governer's race here in Alabama was pretty darn close. If I remember correctly, Reilly won with about a 1% margin. The Libertarian candidate got, roughly, 1 % of the vote. Libertarians may be a minority, but we're a minority the GOP would do well to not ignore.

 

[Jonesy9]

oops, I dropped in on page 4, didn't see the others.

 

[willp58]

OK, It looks clear that the majority is going to vote against Bush...

Now either they will vote for a "Nader" type ( wasted vote - but it "feels" good)...

OR a Democrat...

Expect the anti's to up the stakes when this happens ---The dems have always come after our guns ..
Look who they have on their team:
Shumer, bilery, Biden etc...etc...etc

A vote for a Democrat is a vote for all of them....

Good luck, we're gonna need it.

 

[Bill Hook]

I'd cut off my John Henry before voting for a demokRat.

Why does anything have to happen to Congress? With re-districting in TX, it looks pretty much like the Reps will control at least one house. It would seem RINOs are the biggest threat to RKBA.

 

[Joe Demko]

A vote for Bush is still a wasted vote. The best you have been able to tell us about him is that he isn't as bad as a Democrat. So, if we follow your advice and re-elect him, we get another 4 years of Republican "support" of our gun rights. In his second term will he rescind any executive orders? Will he lead the Republican legislature in repealing any existing laws? Unlikely, I'd say. In fact, the very best we can hope for is that he/they will simply let the status quo continue to exist. Then what? Is there some for-real-and-for-true Republican who is going to restore all we have lost waiting to succeed Bush? Do you think it is possible that the successor might just be one of those Democrats you keep warning us about? Sorry, I don't want to do this game of playing for time when we haven't any other plan or goal than playing for time for its own sake. I'd prefer to have my self-respect and a crisis now, than feel like a whore and still have a delayed crisis anyway.

 

[fix]

The real issue is this. Do I take a chance on falling 3 feet now, or risk falling into the abyss in 4 years? The Hildebeast is coming in 2008 (possibly bringing a Dem congress with her) and the Repubs don't have anything to counter that with.

4 more years of the status quo (at best) under Bush followed by a rapid erosion of rights under Hitlery
...or...
4 years of gridlock (probably status quo) under [insert dem here] followed by a strong conservative administration born from the lessons learned by the Repubs in the 2004 election?

If we teach them a lesson now, it might pay off big time. If we pat them on the back and let them stay in power, it could result in our worst nightmare. The Repubs are sliding left. The only thing that will take them back to the right is a good spanking. While I would never vote for a grabber...I may participate in the spanking by not voting at all. An awful lot is riding on that AWB sunset clause.

 

[ARperson]

fix brings up a good point. If the dems win in 2004, Hitlery will have a hard time running '08. I mean, how can she run against the incumbent? (that's a rhetorical questions; I have no doubt she'd do it if she thought she could.)

will, Tamara is right. You think that a vote is wasted unless you're voting for the winning party. Memo to you: a vote is only wasted when it's not based on sound education about the candidates and their platforms. (Like my step-mom who votes Dem because her daddy did )

If everybody voted his conscience, we might not be stuck with this rotten 2-party system to begin with. A big fat thanks to you for keeping the beast alive.

 

[longeyes]

GRIDLOCK NOW!

What I see is a replay of the 20th century: the robber barons versus the Bolsheviks with Bush & Friends doing what they do best, playing both sides against the middle.

We need to arrest this process and re-take control. Handing Bush a potential mandate for a second term is likely to be disastrous for this Republic. I didn't use to think this, but Bush can thank himself for my change of heart. He had three years to show he stood for the empowerment of the individual and respected the Bill of Rights. He blew it.

 

[Balog]

I'll be voting third party, probably Constitution Party. However, I'm in agreement with this quote.

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do'Til the Revolution

After so many years of government indoctrination in the schools, the creation of a welfare state, the collaboration between our corrupt and morally bankrupt legislature and judiciary, the destruction of states rights, the ceding of sovereignty to such globalistic organizations as the UN, the rise of the police state, the massive and unprotested limiting of natural rights guaranteed in the BOR and elsewhere, and the lack of accountability for the fed.gov murdering it's citizens at places like Waco and Ruby Ridge; I don't think we've any chance of returning this country to a Constitutionally limited Republic via the political process.

 

[Moparmike]

OK, It looks clear that the majority is going to vote against Bush...

Now either they will vote for a "Nader" type ( wasted vote - but it "feels" good)...

OR a Democrat...

Expect the anti's to up the stakes when this happens ---The dems have always come after our guns ..
Look who they have on their team:
Shumer, bilery, Biden etc...etc...etc

A vote for a Democrat is a vote for all of them....

Good luck, we're gonna need it.

Willp58, you havent been paying attention. We arent going to vote for Nader, or a Nader type. We wont be voting Democrat either.

We will be voting libertarian. A Nader type wouldnt feel good. A Democrat wouldnt feel good. Neither would be good. Not only will voting libertarian feel good (as all votes should, because if it feels wrong it probably is), it WILL BE GOOD.

http://www.barbneal.com/wav/ltunes/foghorn/fogleg27.wav
http://www.barbneal.com/wav/ltunes/foghorn/fogleg12.wav
http://www.barbneal.com/wav/ltunes/foghorn/fogleg17.wav

 

[carpettbaggerr]

The Repubs are sliding left. The only thing that will take them back to the right is a good spanking. While I would never vote for a grabber...I may participate in the spanking by not voting at all. An awful lot is riding on that AWB sunset clause.

That's what happened in 1992 with Bill Clinton. That got us the Brady Law, and the AWB. I would rather not have that repeated. Especially with the possibility of several retirements on the Supreme Court.

Lone Gunman,

1,2,3, and 5 may have been the same with Democrats in office. I don't support any of these. I thought #2 was unconstitutional also, what a suprise to see how the Supreme Court can twist that document these days. The new immigration proposal is merely a proposal, and I hope Bush listens to advice against it -- I think it's a bad idea also. On the AWB renewal, I have seen no support from the Oval Office. If he wanted a bill passed, it would be in debate now.

However bad Bush may be, he isn't increasing the erosion of our gun rights. I'm positive you won't be able to say that if a Democrat gets into office.

 

[willp58]

Moparmike wrote:

<<<Willp58, you havent been paying attention. We arent going to vote for Nader, or a Nader type. We wont be voting Democrat either.

We will be voting libertarian. A Nader type wouldnt feel good. A Democrat wouldnt feel good. Neither would be good. Not only will voting libertarian feel good (as all votes should, because if it feels wrong it probably is), it WILL BE GOOD. >>>>>

All this time I keep saying that the *ONLY* candidates that have a chance of winning are Bush, Dean, Kerry or Clark...
Slice it anyway you want ---This is the bottom line...

I keep talking about "feel good" votes....Tell me will the Libertarian candidate have a snow-balls chance in hades?????

The answer is no...I know it and so do you...

SO AGAIN!!!! Of the men that *CAN* win, which one will do us the most good as gun people?????

Hey folks, I'm not beating a drum for Bush, even tho it may sound like it...I just like to deal in realism...

 

[Tamara]

carpettbagger,

So either you vote for the one who's closest to your ideals,

None of the major party candidates is within 3.1415 parsecs of my ideals, sorry. Bush is as far from me as Phillips, Dean, or the hypothetical Green Party candidate... I only appreciate libertarians or conservatives, not tax-'n'-spend welfare statists, sorry.

willp58,

I keep talking about "feel good" votes....Tell me will the Libertarian candidate have a snow-balls chance in hades?????

Not as long as folks lack the stones to vote for him, and so instead vote for someone who wants to steal their rights. Look around on this board; this place should be a bastion of Bush supporters. The fact that there's this much dissention in the ranks here of all places should tell you that the GOP in general (and Bush in particular) have strayed pretty durn far from their natural conservative support base...

 

[Zak Smith]

Several people have posted with the thesis that the Democrats will cause a quicker fatal demise of rights, specifically gun rights, to such an extent that some dramatic changes will eventually occur as a backlash. Specifically, that those backlash changes would occur sooner under a Democratic regime than a Republican regime.

I have a different hypothesis:

Assume that both the Democrats and the Republicans will continue to assume more power and that neither party cares for 2A rights.

The Democratic Paradise is a Socialist State, with the primacy of "fairness": aggressive redistribution of wealth, levelling of income, massive social programs. The economic engine of the country will gradually slow and reach the stagnation of the ineffectual European nations.

The Republican Paradise is looking more like a Fascist State, with the primacy of "The State": no privacy, no security of person or property, dominant executive branch. The military and police will be used to silence and persecute those people who do not agree with The State.

Contrary to those that think voting in Democrats will cause a quicker backlash and change, I believe that the Democratic Paradise is not offensive enough to enough people. The country will simply fade into a nanny state such as exist in Europe today. The decay will take 50 or 100 years. The frog will be boiled very slowly. Yes, individuals will be repressed and their rights infringed upon along the way, but the vast majority of the people won't care- You see, they'll be being taken care of.

Contrast that to the Republican Paradise. The strong executive branch will squash privacy, the Fourth Amendment will be obliterated. The military will be used as an occupying force, in the name of defense against terrorism. Checkpoints and mandatory searches will be ubiquitous. Those who disagree with the State will be silenced. Eventually, "Enemies of the State" will be killed by the Secret Police, with the excuse of National Security.

I claim that more people will notice and do something about Fascism. And the Republicans are taking us towards Fascism. The outrage at the Patriot Act is widespread and from many political positions. The outrage at a welfare state is limited essentially to Rich Bastards and Libertarian Freaks (myself included).

Vote For Change. Vote For Fascism. Vote For Republicans.

-z

 

[355sigfan]

I am not voting for president this year. I can't stomach voting for a democrate and I can't vote for Bush after he passed a bill to take away my overtime pay.
Pat

 

[fallingblock]

Really, Sean......

"most of the Reichstag committed suicide by voting for the Enabling Act and gave Hitler the power to make laws without approval of the President OR the Reichstag..."
************************************************************

What part of "most" do you not understand?

A vote for a Democrat this time around will speed the erosion of our second Amendment freedoms. Count on it.

Bush is more and more the candidate of less and less enthusiasm.

But things can and will deteriorate if the democ-rats prevail.:banghead: