Rush Limbaugh and the defense of G.W. Bush

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RobW

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2002
Messages
564
Location
Henderson, NV
Rush Limbough and the defense of G.W. Bush

Again today, I heared Rush explaining the magnificent strategy of G.W. to destroy the Democratic Party by taking over their policies. That means, G.W becomes a far left-wing Democrat to destroy the Democratic Party!

Either me, or Rush is sick! That strategy is the same as to commit suicide in fear of death! As I remember, G.W. was elected as a CONSERVATIVE president, what we have now is as worse as Clinton. McCain? Left-wing Democrat, Kenny Quinn? Left-wing Democrat!

Face it! They all betrayed us, including Rush Limbough and Sean Hannety. The only guy that stands against this treason is Michael Savage (but often overboard).

AND I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DESTROYED! It would only provide the opportunity for a Republican-Party tyranny.

If we don't get back to the Constitution in 5 or 10 years, America will perish very fast. And with going back to the Constitution means that we go with the words in it, and not with the "living document" liberals, obviously unable and unwilling to read.

Anyone likes to tell me what the meaning of "is" is?
 
Don't sweat it. It's just the pills talking.


(Don't look at me like that! You were all thinking it!) :evil:
 
President Bush is far from a liberal Democrat. On most issues he is a conservative, as promised. He is conservative on taxes, the environment, foreign policy and defense. Where he has disappointed many conservatives, myself included, is on domestic policy. He has made some proposals, such as Social Security reform that are conservative but he has made some boneheaded moves as well.

Just look at the record of the Democrat front runner, John Kerry, and honestly tell me that President Bush is no different! Sen. Kerry voted against most of the weapons that allowed us to fight the terrorist with such steller results. He supported the gutting of our inteligence agencies that have resulted in such poor results recently. There is a world of difference on most issues. Even where President Bush has been liberal on social policy, Sen. Kerry has criticized him for not going far enough.

And I do agree with you on not wanting the Democrat Party destroyed. I would just like to see it evolve to adopt many of the positions of the Libertarian Party. :) That would be a good thing for America and Americans.
 
President Bush is far from a liberal Democrat. On most issues he is a conservative, as promised.
Click to expand...
Let's see, Bush signs the McCain 1st Amendment Repeal Act (AKA Campain Finance Reform) which all the lefties were pushing . . . this is conservative?

Bush indicated he'd renew the AWB if it reached his desk . . . this is conservative?

Bush has yet to veto so much as ONE spending bill . . . this is conservative?

Bush signs a Medicare expansion, that just a few months after passage is already going to cost 1/3 higher more than promised . . . some people refer to this as "Hillary Care Light" . . . this is conservative?

Bush promises to send $15,000.000.000 to various kleptocracies in Africa to fight AIDS . . . this is conservative?
He has made some proposals, such as Social Security reform that are conservative
Click to expand...
The big SS proposal is to extend SS to Mexicans, including ILLEGAL ALIENS, with lesser requirements to collect benefits than Americans have to meet. The Bushies also want to build a SS office in Mexico City, to make it easier for Mexicans - again, including ILLEGALS - to apply for SS benefits. This is conservative?

Speaking of illegals, Bush has YET to lift a finger to protect the border. Conservative?

And just recently, he proposed increasing - rather than abolishing - Federal handouts to the National Endowment for the Arts. This is conservative?

No doubt Democrats like Kerry would be (shudder) worse . . . but starting about a year after he took office, Bush's policies have turned to the left. Sharply.

His actions show he's no conservative. :barf:
 
Gee, Hank, I coulda' sworn I said that President Bush was conservative on most issues but has not been on many social issues (such as the ones you mention). Let me re-read my post.

reading..........

reading..........

I DID say that Hank! You may want to go back and re-read my post.:rolleyes:
 
FWIW, I don't think Rush has condoned or endorsed this strategy. When I listen it sounds like he's simply trying to make sense out of some of the genuinely unconservative things Bush has been pushing. In fact, I seem to recall hearing him stating a few days back that this is certainly NOT the way Bush should be going about beating the Democrats. He seemed quite disappointed that Bush has taken this path, instead of earning votes by winning the hearts and minds of the electorate by standing tall and proudly embracing true conservative ideas such as Reagan and the '94 Republicans did. He actually seemed to get quite upset as he began listing off all the issues he thought Bush and the Republican leaders in Congress were blowing and over-compromising on. He is especially PO'd at repeatedly giving ground in attempts at softening up Ted Kennedy, moves that have been utterly fruitless.

That's how I heard it, anyway. Once again, FWIW. :)
 
HankB is right on the money. And speaking of money... The Federal Reserve Bank is churning it out at a record pace. This is the primary reason for the weaker dollar and a key factor in inflation. This isn't news to anybody who has been paying attention.

The animal we have in the White House now is half Tax & Spend Liberal and half Big Government Conservative. I guess you could call him a Spend & Spend Centrist... :(

I have to keep reminding myself that he's much better than Algore would have been...
 
As I remember, G.W. was elected as a CONSERVATIVE president...
Click to expand...

Well, you can fool some of the people all the time, and all the people some of the time, and...

Frankly, it'd be a lot easier if I could tell the Republicrats from the Democans even with my handy-dandy score card.
 
I've not listened to talk radio in a while, but when I did both Rush and Sean Hannity were spinning like tops to justify El Presidente's actions. They did offer criticism, but it was against a "Vote Bush or we're all gonna die!" kinda backdrop.
 
It's called "triangulation." It's a joy watching conservatives go through this like I had to go through for 8 years with Slick Willie.
Click to expand...

But how can that be Malone? After all, they keep telling us that there's NO difference between loonie leftists like you and right wing wackos like me.:D
 
Just look at the record of the Democrat front runner, John Kerry, and honestly tell me that President Bush is no different!
Click to expand...

Outstanding! We are going to have 2 members of Skull and Bones running against each other :rolleyes:

You guys left out the Farm Bill too ;)
 
You tell 'um HankB!

The words Bush and Conservative simply do not go together.

The new term coined is, I believe, Neo-Con. The "new" conservatives.
They have adopted many liberal notions and are telling us they are conservative.

Big power grab [Patriot Act I & II]....is this conservative?

Adding a huge section of Federal Government [Fatherland Securtiy]...is this conservative?

Spending hundreds of billions of dollars on an ominous "War on Terror"....
is this conservative?

NOT!

And yes, Justin, we have a choice of two "Bonesmen".
As my now Neo-Con in-laws said "there is nothing wrong with having been in a club during college". Oh, brother! Folks, put Skull and Bones in your search engine and let me know what you find.
 
Hey RobW...

Forget the "talking heads". They BS for a living. I listen to them occasionally for "entertainment purposes only". I am about as conservative as they get, and both Rush and Hannity make we wanna puke. If Bush got plastered and peed on the white house lawn, they'd report that he saved countless lives and world freedom by preventing the burning of the capital. Rush's arrogance alone makes me want to tune him out, and his contention that his pending drug prosecution is a "vast left wing conspiracy" smacks of Hillary Clinton.

Glen Beck, Savage (most of the time) and O'Reiley are about as good as it gets, with honorable mention for Michael what's-his-name (the Jewish guy) whenever you can find him.

Bush is a poor conservative, but he still a better one than anything the Dem's have to offer. Picking a president is sorta like picking a pup; you take the best of the litter, secure in the knowledge that he's probably gonna have fleas, and crap on the carpet once in awhile.

Happy voting... but remember, the best pup you can find is still a dog, and the best politician you can elect is still a politician. Watch what they do when they're in power, and look at what's available to replace them. Then make up your own mind, without worrying too much about what professional BS artists have to say about it.

Lucid moment: my brain finally got enough caffiene :what: and it dawned on me that "Michael what's-his-name (the Jewish guy)" is really Michael Medved
 
The republicans are not going to change their direction if you keep voting for them. Vote for a third party in 04 and see how quickly the republicans will return to us if it costs GWB the election. If Libertarians / Constitutional parties get 5-10% of the vote and cost GWB the election we may have a Democrat in the oval office but you can bet your ??? that the congressmen will fight a lot harder for us than they have been.
 
I've been as disgusted as most here each time El Presidente has turned left; almost to the point of ceasing support for him, time and again. But I keep coming back to the fold, out of habit or something I guess.

But recently, I've been wondering if part of the problem is that the Republicans in the House and Senate have been loyal to the de facto party leader, and have simply gone along with what "the boss" wanted.

What would happen if that political allegiance were severed by electing a Democrat president? Maybe we'd see the Congress return to more conservative values? Most of the good or bad things in the offing are truly in the hands of Congress, not the President.

Waddya think?

TC
TFL Survivor
 
Gee Cactus, I re-read your post, and by golly, you DID say Bush was conservative on "most" issues.

Hmmm . . . "most" means "greatest in number" . . . I'm having a hard time seeing more conservative positions than liberal positions, especially during the last 1 1/2 to 2 years. Taxes . . . conservative. Defense . . . conservative. Size of government (including Dept. of Homeland Bureaucracy), liberal. Offshore oil drilling, liberal. Social security, liberal. Medicare, liberal. Budget discipline, Campaign Finance, AWB, arming pilots, immigration, border security, foreign aid, the "arts" . . . all liberal.

He even folded without much of a fight on somewhat conservative positions like ANWR drilling and Miguel Estrada's judicial nomination. Like he was only staking out a "conservative" position for a future sound bite, but wasn't going to fight for it.

Sorry, but by my count, he seems liberal on "most" issues.

What is "is?" What is "most?" :rolleyes:

IMHO Bush is showing his true colors, and figures he'll automatically get our votes - he's entitled to them you know - so long as we see his Democrat opponent as being worse. :barf:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
spot the anti gun activist: Radio Ad Seeks to Undermine Rush Limbaugh
Replies
0
Views
592
Harry Tuttle
H
R
  • Locked
Bush: Take bin Laden attack threat seriously
2 3 4 5
Replies
120
Views
3K
Art Eatman
A
J
  • Locked
I dare call it treason
Replies
1
Views
456
Standing Wolf
S
D
  • Locked
There's a crackdown over Miers, not a "crackup." By Rush Limbaugh
2 3
Replies
54
Views
1K
No_Brakes23
N
C
  • Locked
where do I belong???
2
Replies
39
Views
1K
DRZinn
D
Back
Top