The last straw.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

His first term was spectacular. That is why Bush got reelected. He didn't make deals with democrats, he stood up for what he belived in despite getting torn to pecies. But now Bush, upon nominating that tamp lib to the supreme court, has done an unforgivable sin. He has made a deal with the devil (democrats). Latley he has been becoming more and more liberal, esp. on immigaration, and was also becoming more and more negotiative, not to mention he defended Kofi Ananan, he has been deviating to the left ever since november 3. And now this is the last straw. ==== BUSH!!!. He is an absolute coward. One of the main reasons he was reelected was because of his backbone and strong convictions, but all that has changed. Bush has become a flip-flop. He made the deal that if the democrats passed Roberts, that he would give them a lib, just to avoid confronation, he gave the democrats what they wanted. Screw him. A true leader does what is right despite what may stand in his way, and Bush WAS a shining example of this, until he stabs the American people in the back by nomination this bitch! There is no rule saying that there needs to be a ====ing balance on the supreme court! I belive that a president should nominate who ever will promote what he thinks is right. If a democrat gets the white house and they get the senate, then they earned the right to put whoever will promote their agenda on the supreme court. Plus, we shouln't have to let a minority control a majority, those spineless RINOs not agreeing to the nuclear option is a very low thing. Filibusters give the minority even more power than the majority. Instead of whining crying and bitching all the time here's a concept, become a party that's worth a damn, so the people will elect you to a majority! Don't be a spinless coward and not do the job you were elected to do (vote). Be a man. A minority shouldn't control a majority. I just can emphasize these things enough. We need to reform american politics, bring it back to the gold old days, have more of two extremes at odds with one another in a winner take all format, and less of this comprmising bullshit. I want to see the spoils system to come back, screw negotiating, compromising, being all PC and overly held back and nice. With compromises no one is happy. For hundereds of years this is how it worked, even with no comprimises, mixed laws and stuff are bound to come out and nothings permanent, that is the way it should be, the natural way. We all need to call up our congressmen, esp. the Republicans, and urge them to vote NO on whatever her face is, we can't let this happen make petitions, do whatever is neccesary, Bush is going to fry in hell if he doesn't repent for hiring, among other things, a pro-choicer to the high court, that is a sin if I've ever seen one! No wonder no one likes bush anymore, he's to liberal for us conservatives, and to the libs he's, well, Gerorge W. Bush.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

http://www.anncoulter.org/cgi-local/welcome.cgi


This was written before the nominations, Ann was right on the money as always. NOTE: starting 10/05 this link will bring you to a different article, to access this one, go to the link in the top left corner titled "RIGHT-WING MEMORY BANK" and click on the 9/28/05 article.



http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.asp?feed=FT&Date=20051004&ID=5166065

This one is an article that rings pretty true, even though it is by (P)MSNBC. I found the part about some conservatives thinking that his righteouness in his first term was a ploy to get reelected, though I don't think it's true, as Bush is very opposed to the stem cell research and will finally use his veto if it makes it to his desk, one of the only remaining attributes of Bush the consevative and I am solidly behind him on it, as the war, and gay marriage, and I guess abortion, although I don't know what to believe about his beliefs anymore. I still do probably agree with him more than disagree, but all of his conservative attributes seem to be hiding and he seems to be focusing more on issues that he is liberal on. Probabley since he lost his spine, he doesn't want to stir conflict. The coward. there are many more issues I agree with him on, such as privatizing social security, keeping taxes low and masny many more, but his loss of strong will, his constant kissing of illegal ass, his oppisiton to the minutemen, his support of the UN and Kofi Annan, a few other things and now his nomination of miers, as well as his refusal to focus on ending abortion, gay marriage and things like that have made me disapprove of him, with me slightly approving up until this.

[Argonath]

Somehow, I doubt he secretly planned this with some head of liberals. She's his personal layer, that's probably why he picked her. Not cronyism, but because he believes she has proven herself, albeit only to him. she is yet to come out and say she's liberal or some such. Personally, I would go with someone different, like spiderman, or superman, or, better yet, the green lantern. A black super-hero justice. That would shut the libs up AND there could be a whole new line of comics. I can see it now: "The Adventures of The Green Justice: Kicking everyone in the crotch since 2005!".

[Dagummit]

Slow your roll dude...the facts are starting to come in on this new nominee of his. She is pro-life, a Christian, many of the hard liners are starting to endorse her...she just may be the ace in the hole!

Before uttering fu's at our sitting president, please remember that we have to support him. The darn lib's aren't...

I'll agree that he is not as far right as he should be, but look at the options that we had Nov 03?

Keep it cool dude, all will be okay.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

As Long as you support her Dagnummit, I think that it is safe to say that she is conservative enough!


But Here's another article chronicalling some of Bush's crappy moves.


Hugh Hewitt, whom I admire and generally agree with, is defending the abysmal Harriet Miers nomination by asking conservatives, "Do you trust (George Bush)?" Unfortunately, the reason why this nomination has caused such an uproar on the right is that the answer to that is a resounding, "No."

Knowing what we know today, why should conservatives trust George Bush after the terrible judgement he has shown on so many issues?

It goes without saying that Bush is worse than Lyndon Johnson in the big spending department. In his entire time in the White House, he has never even vetoed a single pork laden bill. Then there's the enormous Medicare prescription drug benefit which will create a massive expansion of government and add a trillion dollars to the debt next 15 years.

We also can't forget the anti-First Amendment, McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill which Bush signed into law or Bush's position on illegal immigration which has alienated a large chunk of the party.

Since his election in 2004, Bush has spent months senselessly flogging Social Security when almost everyone acknowledges it isn't going anywhere. Even on the war in Iraq, an area where many conservatives agree wholeheartedly with his policies, it has been frustrating to watch Bush twiddling his thumbs instead of making a real effort to buck up public support for the war.

Now, to top it all off, Bush has picked a minimally qualified crony without solid conservative credentials for the Supreme Court because...why exactly? He knows her, she has been nice to him, and that makes her the best person to fill one of the most crucial jobs in the country?

You can try to put a good face on this decision if you like, but the very fact that so many conservatives are ripping into Bush over the Miers nomination -- in and of itself -- means she was a terrible selection even if Miers is really to the right of Clarence Thomas.

Bush could have selected judges like Sam "Scalito" Alito, Michael Luttig, Emilio Garza, Priscilla Owen, on and on and on, all of whom:

1) Have much more extensive track records.
2) Would have fired the base up.
3) Would have gotten confirmed.

Since that's the case, to select someone like Harriet Miers -- who will significantly hurt Bush politically -- will be a big mistake even if she does turn out to be a solid conservative vote -- which, by the way, is far from a given.

This was another bungled decision in what is getting to be a startlingly long line of bungled decisions and it's entirely possible that it will cause so much political damage that the GOP will lose Senate seats in 2006 because of it. What makes Harriet Miers worth that?






I hope with every fiber of my being that you are right dagnummit, and I am faithful, maybe I'm being naiive, but I'm faithful that Bush will deviate to the right before his time is up, lets just hope he doesn't ==== our chances in congress in 2006. Perhaps this is a master plan by Bush, he nominates someone who may appear to be liberal at first but he is really pulling the wool over the liberal eye. GOD I hope!

[Bumblebee]

I have to disagree with LABK and TF. I have all the confidence in the world that Miers is the perfect choice.

Bush has always been in favor of making sure we get strong conservative Supreme Court judges that follow the law. It is one of his biggest things he wanted to do from the beginng. He ran for election on that, and Bush does not back down to the Dems. The Democracts and Republicans add a lot of pork to the bills. If Bush wants that bill bad enough, he has to go along with it. All this adds to the deficit.

Bush has known this woman for many years personaly. He knows her extremely well. He had to be sure that this woman would not change her mind on how she feels. She is a conservative and Evangelical with a very impressive resume

The people who write those articles don't know what he knows.

Furthermore, yesterday Newt Gingrich said on the O'Reilly show that Miers is more like a Judge Scalia.

I know a lot of conservatives are down on Bush, and there are things I'm dissapointed about. Like the borders and the vigilantes.

I think if it works out in Iraq, one day in the future, he will be one of our greatest presidents we've ever had. This president has worked hard and has taken a lot on his plate, all while half the nation is bitching about every picky little damn thing he does.

[Dagummit]

As Long as you support her Dagnummit, I think that it is safe to say that she is conservative enough!


I support his choice based on principle rather than anything else. Trust me brother, I do have, in the back of my mind, some room for doubt due to the historical situation with Bush Sr. nominating Souter and believing he was to be truly conservative. But, the difference is that Bush Sr. didn't know Souter as Bush Jr. knows Miers.

I have prayed that this is the right move, for the sake of this country, it has to be. If so (probably is, I feel confident and have faith that it is), Bush Jr. will go down as one of the best warriors this country has ever had as president (at least to the right winged portion of this country).

As far as all the columnists are concerned, they usually know little to nothing, especially the leftist columnists. Even though they make me mad, they are the ones that will be suprised.

Again, with the supporting Bush and his decision to nominate Miers, I have faith that our prayers will be answered with her being right winged enough.

What we need is 9 Clarence Thomas' up there, he is the man!

[IHL]

LABK, I think they could appoint the most conservative person in the world but if they were pro-choice, you'd have a fit.

Personnally, I'm not a one issue type of person. I certainly don't support Bush on a lot of issues, but before I go him an "abolute coward" I'd think long and hard. You obviously aren't. Your views are based on one single issue. Period. It's certainly your right, but it clouds your reasoning ability. IMHO.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

Hey Jackhabit, here's a nice cup of SHUT THE ==== UP!


Either construcitvely contribute to the thread or piss off.


IHL, I'm supprised you didn't do anything to that little twerp

[Argonath]

The confederate flag was the symbol of the south when it broke away from the union. One of the main things that the were rebeling against, if I'm not mistaken, was the end of slavery. Now, it's a sign of rebellion. I'm hip, bizatch!

[Dagummit]

I take it that Jackhabit was targeting me right? The post was deleted before I could read all of it, but I caught some of it in a quote from another member.

What is Jackhabit's story? I haven't been around for a few weeks, so I have no idea who/ what he is?

Jackhabit, a month ago, I would have walked up one side of you and down the other with silly and ignorant comments such as the ones your made, but I have had time unwind and think before I speak. You can't offend me, but your ignorance of the South and how I feel about black people make you look like a complete twit. Try harder next time, you just may sound like you have a first grade education.

[IHL]

Back on track.

I give everyone a bit of space. If it keeps up, he'll be dealt with, just like the others have been.

Now enough of the whining. Let's get back to the thread.

[SealabFan77]

Listen, I'm as conservative as the next man, but even if there was a Democrat in office right now, I'd show him as much respect as I do Bush, BECAUSE HE'S THE RULER OF THE GREATEST COUNTRY EVER! The lack of respect by most Americans makes me pray for the day it falls. You see, this is what happens when you give people the right to do what they want. They abuse it, make you look bad for letting them abuse it, and then ==== you over! ====ing hypocrits should have their frontal lobes removed, shredded, dried, and sold as food for pets! Hypocricy! Now that, my friends, THAT is the LAST STRAW!

[Madcowhunter]

Dagummit, Jackhabbit was insulting you for portraying a Confederate Flag.
Slavery had little to do with the forming of the Confederacy, and even more little to do with the Civil War. The reason for the Confederacy had mostly to do with trade and economy. While the north of was importing and exporting, the South was prohibited to doing such actions, and it was Southern goods that were being exported. So, according to the Southerners, the notherners were making big money at the expense of Southern labor and land.

Slavery was a issue, and it's obvious that the conflict between abolitionists and anti-abolitionists contributed to the sucession, but it was not the reason.
And it most certaintly was not the main issue in the war. Lincoln invaded the South because he wanted to keep the Union in tact, and he was willing to use force. Most Confederate soldiers fought back in defense of their state, their loyalties were with their home.
Both the Union and the Confederacy should be shown respect. I feel I should say this because so many view the Confederacy as redneck hillbilly pushovers. Next time you think that, remember, these rednecks took down 2/3 of the Union Army, while the Union had a larger force, more guns, and the power of the president of industry behind their backs.

Lastly, I will add, that the Confederate Flag is not a symbol of slavery, it is a battle flag. It isnot supposed to stand for biggotry or rebellion, it is strictly a symbol of the Civil War.

[Madcowhunter]

Now, with that said. There is no more need to continue a chat about the Civil War. I just thought I would clear that up for Jackhabbit and Argonath.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

No I am not a "one issue" guy, I am extreme on just about every issue if you've read some of my very angry posts, about immigaration, flag burning and literally dozens more, however, abortion is the trumper the end all, it is by far my number one issue, It is more important than anything nothing else comes close.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

what did jack(ass)habit post, Wadi erased it and I'm curious

You guys have convinced me. I yet agian support our pres full heartedly thank you so much for reinstating my faith and ending my two day angry rant.

[Madcowhunter]

Insulting Daguumit because of his avatar.

[Argonath]

Now, with that said. There is no more need to continue a chat about the Civil War. I just thought I would clear that up for Jackhabbit and Argonath.

I'm weak in the Civil War area, please forgive my ignorance. :frown:

[jackhabit]

Lastly, I will add, that the Confederate Flag is not a symbol of slavery, it is a battle flag. It isnot supposed to stand for biggotry or rebellion, it is strictly a symbol of the Civil War.

well, the swastika was derived from a navajo symbol representing the four winds which is as far from third reich fascist propaganda you can get, but that doesn't do ANYTHING to dispell the ugly symbolism many (more like MOST) attribute to it. i understand the history of the confederate flag, AND how the main reason for the civil war was NOT the presevation of slavery, but that does NOTHING to distract from the fact that MOST people see it as a symbol of hatred and bigotry. a VERY ugly symbol actually, and i'd be willing to wager that if you surveyed 100 people, and asked them what the confederate flag means to them, an overwhelming amount would come back with the same answer i just gave. this is not a discussion of what the flag "truly" means, buy rather, what it means to others. personally, i see flying that flag as a lame-ass empty gesture. i think a lot of folks, mr. dagummit included, do it to "shock" others in a pathetic attempt at some poorly-concieved quasi-rebellion. if you wanna be a proud southerner - great! wanna fly the rebel flag - even better, as that's your right no matter how inane. but, there is nothing any more rebellious or pride-inducing about that act than there is in going to your local strip mall and buying a "big johnson" or "you may be a redneck" shirt or any other non-humorous item targeted towards the "less than creative thinkers" market. some people see it as a symbol of hate, others of pride, i see it as a symbol of ignorance, inconsideration, and a golden bullhorn blaring the doctrine of extreme stupidity.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

i see it as a symbol of ignorance, inconsideration, and a golden bullhorn blaring the doctrine of extreme stupidity.

Hmmm funny, that's how I see all of your posts.

[Android]

but that does NOTHING to distract from the fact that MOST people see it as a symbol of hatred and bigotry. a VERY ugly symbol actually, and i'd be willing to wager that if you surveyed 100 people, and asked them what the confederate flag means to them, an overwhelming amount would come back with the same answer i just gave.


Well, I see it as art. And I have learned, right here on this forum, that art can come in many forms cant it? It can come in the form of a painting of happy little puppies playing in a field with a small child, A gun to the head of our leader of the United States of America, or, by what I have read right here on this forum, Our Flag in the Toilet or a jar of urine. (ok, that was sarcasm folks)
If we put up with all that crap and label it as art then we are all going to deal with Dags flag the same way. HANDS OFF.
Jack-I bet your right about your little survey, but it would also prove that the majority of those surveyed would be wrong now wouldn't it.

[Dagummit]

... i understand the history of the confederate flag,...

Somehow I really doubt this...



...from the fact that MOST people see it as a symbol of hatred and bigotry. a VERY ugly symbol actually,


I am not "most people"...


... and i'd be willing to wager that if you surveyed 100 people, and asked them what the confederate flag means to them, an overwhelming amount would come back with the same answer i just gave.


Depends on who you survey. Idiots like you? Yes, you are probably right. Real Americans like me? Then, the flag is an honorable symbol that idiots like you and the leftist media have whored to no end.


... i think a lot of folks, mr. dagummit included, do it to "shock" others in a pathetic attempt at some poorly-concieved quasi-rebellion.


Funny how you have never meet me, never replied to another post of mine before this, never talked to me...never known me, that you can come to this conclusion. But that is just like an idiot lib, you sterotype all of us Southerners the same, then with the next breath ridicule me for "sterotyping" blacks. You see the trend here? Lame isn't it?

[Oi_Ve]

If it keeps up, he'll be dealt with, just like the others have been.


Damn IHL, could you sound anymore like an evil overlord talking to his minions?

"Mod rhymes with God for a reason"
- Oi_Ve

[All American Kid]

Well since it appears that topics changed and maybe it'll be tollerated, :icon_neut

I am personally curious as to what JH knows about the confederate flag. The Articles of Confederation was the last attempt in the US to uphold what our founding fathers indented with the Constitution of the United States. So when the states decided to go to war they would not fly under the federal flag of the confederation (because they where not federal troops but Virginian, Alabama, Kentucky troops). So they would fly under the battle flag (the stars and bars on dagnumit’s avatar). Much the way that US French and UK troops would fight under the flag of the UN.

Where the slave issue came in is that Lincoln had to keep the French out of the war to supply the South with goods. So French policy stated that they where not to aid a side in a war that slavery was an issue thus in a cunning move Lincoln passed the Emancipation Proclamation. It made me ill when I explained this to a liberal and he was clueless as to what I was talking about even thought I was making this up. I reckon it’s the dumbing down of America at work.

But nevertheless the Confederacy was actually the first government that passed an anti-slavery law in the US (the prohibition of the importation and exportation of slaves) and in fact set their slaves free at the end of the war and had the first bi-racial ranks that fought on American soil.