What happened to the George Bush we elected?

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

I am a Bush supporter. I support him on all of my priority issues, such as abortion, gay marriage, and gun control. But he second term has been rather sketchy. He gets in bed with illegals and calls the very effective minutemen "vigilantes". He preaches bi-partisanship. He supports Kofi Annan. He scolds conservatives for their non-support of him nominated that one mexican dude for the supreme court. What is he doing? Does he really belive in what he is doing or is he just trying to make the republican party appear moderate, along with those "republicans" in congress. His first term was much better. He was far to the right, but was enough of an ambassador to get reelected. As a matter of fact, all the officials of the republican party are creeping to the left. Despite the fact that the trumping issue of the election, which ultimatley kept them in the white house was moral values, which is my priority, yet they seem to be focusing on less controversial, and frankly less important issues like education, the economy and healthcare. The party leadership, not the members, are becoming like democrats and trying to look moderate, and it sucks. We need to campign to take back our party and put it back to the right where it belongs.

[RightisRightLeftisWrong]

I have said to time and time agian "The Illigal immgration" problem is getting out of hand, Bush seriously needs to do somthing about that quickly. But I got a feeling they wont neither would a liberal, because Hispanic votes are a big majority now sadly enough.

[Wadi66]

Isn't the definition of vigilante one who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one's own hands. Vigilante is also the spanish word for vigilre which means to be watchful. So why is Bush wrong for calling the minutemen "vigilantes"?he didn't say it in spanish, therefore the spanish definition doesn't hold water.

I don't know guys, you ever gonna understand that Bush wants a one world government starting with the border being merely a check point? Understand that principle and everything he does falls into place.

I'm a die hard Constitutional Conservative and the man is really *issing me off.

[Douglas Adams]

I'm a die hard Constitutional Conservative and the man is really *issing me off.

I am too, but I really don't blame Bush as much as you might. Yes, I'm disappointed that he is being more moderate on some issues like immigration, but I think that it is partly the fault of the republican party for telling him to be more moderate. He's just trying to please both parties, but the communist party (liberals) will never be happy. Bush needs to screw the liberals and act as he believes, and for him to do that, he needs our support.

[Douglas Adams]

This is simple. Do you agree with what George Bush is doing at this point? Do you think he is doing a good job. What should he change?

[Wadi66]

Doug, I merged the thread you started with this one. I think they both address the same issue.

As for Bush, perhaps you should re-read my post. As long as Bush supports a one world government, he will NEVER act as a conservative. The two are totally opposite.

[FKLBRLS]

The problem with Bush now is that the media is further up his ass than ever before. Every sentence in the media begins and ends with F*** Bush. In order to make an attempt to get them out so that he can get more, he acts more bipartisan. Bush is turning the way he is to get the media off his ass, the media who can't stand him or any Republican. Unless the whole country views the media for the Republican hating, liberal glorifying, BS that it is; Bush could continue in the downward direction that he is going. But that won't happen, the Democrats will continue to say that Republicans are paranoid and the media sides with the conservatives.

Democrats stand for what they think is logical

Republicans stand for what they know is true

[chi1088]

That would be true if the media had covered the Downing Street Memo.

[Avid_Liberal_Hater]

Isn't the definition of vigilante one who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one's own hands. Vigilante is also the spanish word for vigilre which means to be watchful. So why is Bush wrong for calling the minutemen "vigilantes"?

Because Bush clearly meant it as a negative.

[Argonath]

That's funny. A friend was saying that all the liberals were going to the right. Every one is changing places. or something. . . .

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

This is simple. Do you agree with what George Bush is doing at this point? Do you think he is doing a good job. What should he change?

Yes, yes I still do approve of Bush. He is still pro-life, advertly anti-terror, pro-gun, anti-gay marriage, openly christian, and many more of my priority issues (abortion is by FAR #1), and I still support him. We just need to, as the people of the republican party, and not the leaders, who are leading us to the left, need to encourage him to go back to the right, because that's where the heart of this party is.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

On the other hand, the people somehow seem to be drifting left too, with Rudy Giuliani (who I wouldn't vote for) and John McCain (who reluctently I would vote for) leading in the polls, and 49% of republicans supporting embryotic stem-cell research, they seem to be creeping left, too. I predict this will change. I hope.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

It does seem kind of that the leadership of the democratic party is also going towards the center, not as much as republicans, I'd say, but they still support the war and stuff.

[Wadi66]

It does seem kind of that the leadership of the democratic party is also going towards the center, not as much as republicans, I'd say, but they still support the war and stuff.Don't believe it for one second. Its just to appear acceptable to as many as possible. Once the election is over, all bets are off.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

Proof that the leadership of our party is much farther to the left than the masses of the party, is that even with a good number of democrats voting to ban gay marriage 57% in Oregon, 70% in Missouri, 80% in Georgia, probably only a little bit over 50% of congress would vote to ban gay marriage, if that.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

Don't believe it for one second. Its just to appear acceptable to as many as possible. Once the election is over, all bets are off.

That's remarkable considering the elections are still about 4 years off.

There's no rest for the wicked I guess.

[Wadi66]

That's remarkable considering the elections are still about 4 years off.

There's no rest for the wicked I guess.#1 while the general election isn't until '08, there are Senators and Representatives coming up for election next year. There are a number of seats the liberals would like to win or win back. Once an encumbant is in, its harder to get them out. They need the leverage to fight off Bush and to add power should they win the White house. #2 it takes time to shift the voters mind set. They can't start in '07 (when campaigning for preseident will begin) to start convincing voters they're more central. It has to start now.

And yes, they are quite wicked.