Why did I vote for Bush?

Well put Stu- I am a conservative, gun toting, fundamental Bible believing Baptist. I tend to vote for the person who is most in line with the way I belive, PERIOD! Last presidential election that man was Bush. Next November, that man will again be Bush. I just hope the Lord comes back befor ALL of our rights are whittled away one by one. If you boys think Howard or Sharpton will take you down the road you want to go, by all means vote for them. What kind of man would you be if you compromised your principals? AW
 
Stu I have to agree with you wholeheartidly on this. I cannot conceive of why anyone would vote for any of the democrats trying to run. I also don't agree with bush on everything, but he is by far better than any of the alternitives we face. Sometimes its not who you vote for, but who you vote against. And yes, I do believe voting for perot helped get that sleaze clinton into office. We are lucky he didn't destroy more of America than he did. And Bush is way too liberal for my tastes, but what choice do we have?
Barry
 
"You talk of the higher taxes that the Democrates want to impose, yet nothing on the overspending of the Republicans.So it's OK on one hand to spend more as long as this generation doesn't have to pay the bill."

That sure looks like you're saying that I said that. I did not. If you're not saying that I said it, then you're arguing with yourself.
 
I'll vote for someone whom I believe will stop our continued decline, no matter how hopeless others tell me it is.
Click to expand...
That kind of thinking and voting, is exactly what got Clinton elected. This what I call cutting off your nose to spite your face.
 
I have voted Republican since Richard Nixon. With both Bushes I had to hold my nose. I new going in that Dad was a liberal, but I held out a little hope for Jr., but alas I have been sorely disappointed. The Democrat voting block is made up of certain defined segments of society.
The Replicrats however have a voting block made up of people who will ignore and forgive any thing they do because "after all they are not as bad as the democrats". I am no longer sure of that.
During the first Bush presidency the head of the Republican National Committee ( I cannot remember his name--Lee something and he died of cancer) was challenged about how gun owners would react to one of Bush's anti-gun actions. His reported reply was "F" em. Where are they going to go." That is exactly how George feels about every one of you who are defending him and his sell out of American jobs and borders. And don't kid yourself, when push comes to shove, he will likely be as anti-gun as a Kennedy. Cause he knows we will all forgive.
Well as far as I am concerned he does not deserve another term. He'll probably get it--but listening to folks talk at the basketball game this morning--He may be in for a suprise. :eek: I would not be at all suprised to see a Clark/Hillary ticket.
At least with a Republican congress and and a Democratic President maybe they would not rubberstamp ever thing the President wants.
On the other hand, some of you may be looking forward to predator hunting on MARS!!! :rolleyes:
OC
 
If you vote for someone who has zero chance of winning, it may feel good. But in reality all you have accomplished is to opt out of choosing between the 2 real choices and allowed everyone else to choose for you.
Click to expand...
Stu it doesnt make me feel good when I know Im voting for a looser canidate.The other reality is that when you vote for either of the 2 real choices and any one of them win you have cast your vote knowing you are going to give up a certain amount of freedoms and place this country farther down the road of socialism.I have no chance of winning with a 3rd party nor do I have a chance of winning with the 2 real choices.Look at Bush's domestic agenda and what he's implimented.Do you really think you've won anything if he wins again?Yes I know the dems are worse,we all do.But that doesnt change the fact that you are still voting for a looser.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll vote for someone whom I believe will stop our continued decline, no matter how hopeless others tell me it is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That kind of thinking and voting, is exactly what got Clinton elected. This what I call cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Click to expand...
Thank god our founding fathers didnt take the approach of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.I know,I know its hopeless.I just hate dieing without putting up a fight.It just doesnt seem very American to me.
Stu- you said a mouthful. I wish more people could figure this out.
Click to expand...
Thats the whole point of the post,I have figured it out.If you vote for Bush and you think your helping our country by voting against Dems,your wrong.Bush is just as bad.You just havent figured that out yet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bush's are no more conservative than the Clinton's the Kennedy's etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mo- If you believe that, you don't have a very good grasp on reality, or at least a good definition of conservative.
Click to expand...
How could anyone say Bush is a conservative?As I said before,other than tax-cuts please imform me.Could I hear the bad definition of conservative?One conservative act and 15 socialist acts doesnt define conservative.
Dont take me the wrong way guys.Your trying to say Im crazy for wanting to try to change things and Im trying to say your the same for not standing up to the challenge.I think I know how Saadam felt when the military came knocking.
God have mercy on us all.Thanks for the vent.
 
Barry206,

I agree with most of what you are saying. President Bush would not have been my first choice but overall he has proven to be a good and moral man.

Even President Reagan gave illegal aliens a type of amnesty and most (myself included) conceder him the Father of Conservatism.

It seems whenever a viable third candidate gets in the race it tilts the scale one-way or the other for one of the big 2 parties. With Perot we got Clinton, with Nader we got President Bush.

In our life time (I’m 39) I do not see a third party candidate ever occupying the White House.

Vote your conscience but also think of the consequences.

I tip my hat to you that you at least vote. I know many who don’t.

Steve
 
Steve,thank you for not carring any indiffrences into this thread.Your a good man.I agree,Bush seems to be an honest man.I just wish he'd follow the constitution.I agree that the liberitian party is not the anwser,I wish I new what was.
 
Your trying to say Im crazy for wanting to try to change things

No, I don't think anyone here has said that. I have wanted to change things most of my adult life.

If I had my way, I'd have a real conservative or libertarian type to vote for. I'd have another Ronald Reagan on my ballot if I could. But I don't.

And until the LP, or some other party, does what I outlined above and starts earning people's respect sufficiently to be taken seriously and winning seats, the 2 main parties are what it's gonna be.

That isn't fatalism, it's a simple observation of the facts. Like it or not, that's how it works right now.

This is the reality. This is what's on the table and at stake in this election:

GW Bush, who is not anywhere near being the conservative I want in the White House, or one of these others, most of whom are so driven by the lure of power they would rather see America suffer huge losses in Iraq simply because that would give them a better chance of winning an election here, most of whom would not act on matter of our national security without asking permission from the UN first, who would train wreck our just-recovering economy. People who, on EVERY matter, have the arrogance to think that they know better than you & should therefor make your decisions for you.

Votes for a 3rd party, or not voting at all, is the functional equivalent of voting for one of these people.

Everyone has the right to vote how they wish. I personally think we also have the responsibility to understand what the actual consequences of that vote is. In 1992 my son voted for Perot (his first election to vote in). I asked him if he wanted Clinton to win? He replied that no, he didn't, but he knew Bush was going to win. He just wanted to "send him a message by casting a protest vote".

Well, he sent him a message all right, and we got 8 years of Clinton. I knew that was a very real possibility, that's what occurred, and I dang sure wish it hadn't.

The 9 Dwarfs are not even Clinton. They are all to the left of him.

Another election, with a different political evironment may be another thing. This year, 2004, it's going to be a republican or a democrat. If you vote for a 3rd party, it serves to help elect the dem.

You may not see much difference beween Bush & the dems. I do, and I see some huge ones. But there is ALWAYS a difference, even if it's small. Sometimes the difference is between "bad" and "worse", which may seem small, but is really a much bigger distinction than that between "good" and "better".
 
And just fer grins, a moment of levity at the expense of our electoral process /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

nq040111.gif
 
From the Roman statesman Cicero in the 1st century BC as he witnessed the decline of the Roman Republic "When we inherited the Republic from our forebears it was like a beatiful painting whose colors were fadding with age.We have failed to restore its original colors and have not taken the trouble to preserve its overall composition or even its general features."
 
It seems clear now that we are getting close to our one world government, and it won't matter who get's elected. No one becomes president unless they are an elitist.
 
It's the U.N. behind alot of it, pushing for the "new world order" pushing for Agenda 21.

"59 Socialists in Congress - 2002" By Chuck Morse

http://www.chuckmorse.com/59_socialists_in_congress.html

"Freedom loving Americans would be well advised to keep a close eye on socialist Congressmen. While they may talk like the rest of us, especially when sojourning in their respective districts, they operate from a different paradigm. If they decide to support a war against Iraq, for example, or any other intervention overseas, their motives would more likely be based on an agenda that seeks to entangle the US in a new world order than in protecting the interests of sovereign America."

Do everything in our power, legally to keep them out of office or possitions of power.

As I've said before, beating a dead horse, we've got to get the U.N. out of our country and our lives. Kato, WTC, NAFTA and a slew of others undermine our sovereignty.

Getting onto those that help make the laws is one way of trying to change things. Backing the Republican Party, sending them your "point of view" on everything reported and helping get the platform going in your direction may stem the tied to socialisum.

Getting out of the U.N. is mainstream.

just my 2cents. God Bless.
 
Some of you mentioned having a third party. We've had three parties for years, and it doesn't work in reality. It's just more of the same. I think maybe what we need is someone who'll say,
"I love this country and its people, and will work in their best interest to the exclusion of all others." Lets forget about the others for a while and consentrate on our own people. Sometimes you just have to look inward, and ignore the global aspects. Lets get our own house in order. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal
 
I think there are alot more than 59 socialists in congress. In my opinion every democrat is the same as a socialist, maybe worse cause the pretend not to be. Its a cold day before I ever vote for any socialist, no matter what they choose to call themselves.
Barry
 
How could anyone say Bush is a conservative?As I said before,other than tax-cuts please imform me.
Click to expand...
1. Opposes "same sex marriages"

2. Proposes eliminating the Estate or "Death" tax.

3. His foriegn policy that has refused to bow down to the U.N. (Iraq and Afganistan come to mind).

4. Use of churches and religious (faith based) organizations to implement charity services.

5. Attempts to install Conservative judges that have the Dems screaming (particularly if they happen to be minorities).

6. Environmental policy that is based more on conservation than preservation.

None of these are embraced by "liberals".

There are more, but you get the idea.
 
well im only 16 so im not sure what yall consider right or wrong, conservative or liberal. but the way i look at it whats wrong with bushs veiws, hell 5 outa those 6 previously listed seem like good morals the US should have. just a 16 yr olds .02 cents
 
I hear you YH.He also talked of partial privitizing social security.I definitally wanted the death tax repealed.But nothing has been done so far on either of these issues.I still have hope.He could ease the pain of alot of constituants by folling through on these two issues.The judges seem to be in limbo,nothings getting done.The enviromental issues really havent amounted to much either.He says he wants to open up Alaska but havent heard about that in a while.
So basically he opposes death tax,same sex marriage,and a more conservative enviromental policy but very little if any have actually been implimented in any of these catagories.The same for the judgeships also.I'll give him great credit for not bowing down to the UN though.
He did impliment a monstrous social intitlement with prescripiton drugs,billions to Africa,1st amendment violation by not vetoing the McCain Fiendgold deboccal,and if he does open up the borders[or not close them]its just another deal.If he had just talked about implimenting these socialist issues it would be one thing.But instead he just talks about the conservative issues and impliments the liberal ones more than the ones he ran on.The church and same-sex thing dont really matter to me,they dont effect my life like opening up the borders or restricting my 1st amendment rights.The others you mentioned he has done nothing but talk about,no action.Maybe Im forgetting something but remind if I did.I know all his tax cuts sunser in another 8 years and they arnt drilling in Alaska of off shore.No major judgeships have been installed have they?I heard a few minor ones were.Another question,why are thE Mexicans protesting Bush in Mexico?What more could they possibly want?California back.
 
Barry-

1. The conservative judges that he tried to install were fillibustered by the Senate which is controlled by the Democrats. Nothing he could do since they blocked it, Hilary Clinton being a major force.

2. Most of the other conservative things he has tried to do have been blocked by the Democratic majority in the Senate.

3. While you say same sex marriage and religious freedoms don't concern you, they most certainly concerm me. Christianity is becoming the only religion that is not tolerated in this country.

4. I forgot to mention that Bush is Anti-abortion. I hope you don't say this does not concern you as well.

Both 3 and 4 are major areas where our country is showing our moral collapse. both of these directly impact the America as we know it and America as our founding fathers knew it. Both of these are supported by the liberal left, most of which tend to be Democrat.

I do not agree with everything that Bush does. Although I don't agree with them, some I understand and some I do not. Some are concessions to either get other things accomplished or a means to get reelected. If he is not re-elected, a lot of the "Conservative" things won't matter anyway, because they will be undone by the next president, who as a Democrat will take us farther left.

Basic platforms of the Democratic Party are:

1. Pro-abortion
2. Pro homosexual
3. Pro tax (this includes Estate tax, marriage penalty tax, and a lot of others)
4. Pro welfare
5. Pro Special rights (I think of Affirmative action, Hate Crimes that say if I kill you because you are black it is worse than killing you because looked funny, and laws that give minorities entitlements). See number 4.
6. Nationalized Health care. This is PURE Socialism.
 
It seems to me that even if you don't like Bush as much as you used to...and even if his immigration policies are borderline absurd...he is still the lesser of the two evils.

I'd rather see him in office again over any of those nut democrat candidates that are running...

Have fun wasting your vote on Sharpton...
 
Back
Top