What will the final straw be for Bush 'defenderers?'

Parent Cafe
1

<p>With new disclosures of more domestic spying by the NSA (and laying naked Bush’s lies about the extent of NSA involvement domestically), with the coming indictment of Karl Rove, with Bush looking less and less “presidential” and the CONTINUED raping of America’s future generations to enrich the rich, how much will it take before the defenders of Bush finally say, “I’ve had enough!” and throw in the towel?</p>

<p>I really can understand that conservative Republicans will NEVER back Democrats, but when will they see that this idiot and his cohorts are ruining the conservative cause for the foreseeable future?</p>

<p>{{{{{shaking head}}}}}</p>

2

<p>Maybe an illicit affair would do it?</p>

3

<p>NYMomof2…</p>

<p>Oh how you made me laugh this morning and brightened up my whole day! Seriously, thanks for the chuckle… :)</p>

4

<p>I’m prepared to be flamed off the forum here, by the way.</p>

<p>I supported Bush in both elections and am a member of Security Moms for Bush. You ask what the last straw would be? Well it came the day before yesterday. The information sharing vis a vis border crossings with the Mexican government. It’s fine with me if the government monitors conversations to or from points outside of the country to protect its citizens, but it is beyond the pale for that government to sell out its citizens to a hostile foreign government. For those of you who think that Bush supporters are blind, you couldn’t be more wrong. We all weigh things in the balance and make choices. IMO, Bush was much better than Kerry. That said, there is a real movement for impeachment on the hard right. I don’t share that view, but I can tell you that Bush has lost his base and it’s all due to immigration. When he let Dan Bartlett go on tv two weeks ago to reiterate his support for “amnesty” I almost threw the tv out the window. The base is angry as hell, but it’s not about the issues that the left is concerned about. (Big surprise) Here is a quote from John Derbyshire of NRO that pretty much sums it up:</p>

<p>"This thing about our govt. colluding with Narcistan — sorry, I mean Mexico — to keep the flow of illegal immigrants coming, is the last straw. Either our govt. is criminally incompetent, or else it is maliciously hostile to ordinary American citizens. Or both.
I kept my mouth pretty well shut when the splendid whack-'em’upside-the-head assault on Iraq turned into a ludicrous and apologetic “nation-building” exercise. I bellyached in a restrained fashion at the Harriet Miers farce. I kept my grumbling over Medicaid, the budget bloat, and border security at a decently low volume. This one, though, I can’t take.
I can’t think of a single thing to say in favor of the national Republican party, its senators, representatives, governors, and administration. I can’t think of a single reason why, right now, I should vote for any of them.
I could never vote for the liberal mob; but if a conservative third party comes up between now and 2008, they’ll have my full attention — likely my money and my vote, too. We are on the last page of Animal Farm here; I can no longer tell the men from the pigs.</p>

5

<p>Interesting that with all the debacles of the past miserably long years since Bush was selected in 2000, the conservatives are all bent out of shape about immigration.</p>

<p>It is hard to believe that the senseless loss of lives in two unnecessary, illegal wars, the continuing escalating deficit, the perks to the rich and loss of services to the middle class (forget about the poor…the compassionate conservatives sure have), the lobbying, the lying, the complete disregard for the law…that immigration is the key issue.</p>

<p>Please explain why.</p>

6

<p>zoosermom -</p>

<p>Now for the hard question: Where does a true conservative (fiscal conservatism, constitutionalism, patriotism, etc) turn? </p>

<p>It’s somewhat easy for me, being a registered Democrat (although I think that the entire political process has been ruined by the money issues and many Dems are just as guilty for our mess as Republicans). My wife was registered Republican for many years (even though her vote crossed party lines many times). She never was a Bush supporter, even from the first election, but just last week she marched down to change her party affiliation.</p>

<p>Bush has fulfilled his promise to be a Uniter not a Divider. He has united everyone against him.</p>

7

<p>"Interesting that with all the debacles of the past miserably long years since Bush was selected in 2000, the conservatives are all bent out of shape about immigration.</p>

<p>It is hard to believe that the senseless loss of lives in two unnecessary, illegal wars, the continuing escalating deficit, the perks to the rich and loss of services to the middle class (forget about the poor…the compassionate conservatives sure have), the lobbying, the lying, the complete disregard for the law…that immigration is the key issue.</p>

<p>Please explain why."</p>

<p>I will explain why, with the understanding that I am a polite and respectful person and will not continue to discuss this if further posts aren’t polite. This is not a reflection on you, personally, but as a conservative living in New York, I’ve taken more than enough nonsense for a lifetime. I’ve literally been spit on by protesters at the Republican convention and been treated terribly by supposedly enlightened, open minded liberals. I have never understood why the liberals here in NYC are so utterly intolerant, but I’ve been told that conservatives in heavily-conservative areas behave the same way, so . . .</p>

<p>First of all, I don’t think that the two wars were in any way illegal. That is a matter of debate on which I won’t change my mind and I’m sure you won’t change yours, so I’m not going to bother with that.</p>

<p>I am a middle class person who lives in NYC, so I have a much broader definition of middle class than some other people. I also vehemently oppose redistribution of income, which we see on a daily basis here. Give me the money that I work for and let me live my life according to my values and priorities. On fiscal policy, though, I think Bush is a total bust and that the tax cuts, without fixing AMT, is really not a tax cut at all for people like me. Take two handsful and give back one. </p>

<p>If by “lying” you’re referring to WMD or the Iraq War, we will have to agree to disagree. As for immigration, well, it’s funny to me that you don’t find border jumping, immigration fraud, conspiracy and a whole host of other things to be instances of complete disregard for the law. My boss is a Pakistani Muslim and it astounds him that Americans view the border as a Mexican issue when so many of his countrymen are coming over the southern border, and as he puts it “they aren’t coming to cut your grass.”</p>

8

<p>Digmedia: “Now for the hard question: Where does a true conservative (fiscal conservatism, constitutionalism, patriotism, etc) turn”</p>

<p>Thank you for asking so courteously. The honest answer is that I truly don’t know. I never, in my wildest dreams, thought that Bush would spend money like a drunken sailor, would be so tone deaf to his base, would be so clueless about some very basic issues, would be loyal beyond a fault. I am a very politically active person and I can’t imagine who I will support. I like Rudy a lot, although I didn’t vote for him the second time, and see him as probably idealogically closest to me of any potential candidates, but I don’t see him getting the nomination. I like McCain on some issues but he make me nuts on immigration (there I go again.) I would never, ever, on pain of death support Hillary, so I guess I’m just going to have to wait and see. </p>

<p>All of that aside, I do think that the media is a fifth column here in 2001 and that if Bush walked on water on his way to cure cancer and instantly bring world peace, the NYT headline would be “Bush can’t swim.” The AP reporting on the letter from Iran the other day was proof positive of that.</p>

9

<p>Zoos, I have no disrespectful agenda.</p>

<p>I am all for secure borders, and for legal methods of immigration, and am opposed to all methods of law breaking, no matter by whom.</p>

<p>Therefore, I am much more aghast at President Bush’s utter and vocal disregard for over 700 laws, many of which he has openly broken or disregarded, than I am at a poor Mexican jumping the fence to come pick berries for $1 a day. I am more incensed at the business owners who hire illegals and pay them below minimum wage, which is also against the law.</p>

<p>So, the lawbreaking is top down. I am bothered by all of it, but seems the prez isn’t setting a very good example about lawfulness, so why should anyone else pay attention to rule of law? This is the way to a rogue state (tongue in cheek, sort of), but really, without the government adhering to the law, do we wonder why people jump the fence here?</p>

10

<p>Allmusic: I agree with everything you posted. There are plenty of issues in which I disagree with Bush, but immigration is the one that I simply can not live with .</p>

11

<p>“Therefore, I am much more aghast at President Bush’s utter and vocal disregard for over 700 laws, many of which he has openly broken or disregarded,”</p>

<p>Care to list 10 or 20 such laws that he has broken? I’m sure that from a list of “over 700” it shouldn’t be too difficult to come up with 10 or 20 representative ones.</p>

12

<p>I’ll start with two: Number 1: FISA, which seems quite clear and was originally created to cover the very act committed by this administration. And Number 2: Pushing phone companies to violate Section 222 of the Federal Communications Act, which specifically prohibits turning over phone records without a warrant. Of course you’re going to argue that because he’s the Dicta… I mean, President, he can just create an executivce order excusing anyone from any law. And I suppose you can also argue that AT&T, Bell South, and Verizon were the ones violating the law, not the administration. It won’t fly with me.</p>

13

<p>Dig, Dig,
You’re just spouting KosKid stuff here. Please. Assuming there was a “violation” of Section 222 as you cite it, it sounds as if the phone companies are the ones in violation, no? As for FISA, I’ve posted many many detailed debates among serious constitutional scholars demonstrating conclusively that, at the very least, the terrorist monitoring program was not “clearly” illegal.</p>

14

<p>Threatening Qwest with a loss of government business if they did not go along with violating the law is OK with you? </p>

<p>(aside: what is KosKid?)</p>

15

<p>Any time, digmedia! I understand that Qwest is the only major telecommunications company that resisted the administration. </p>

<p>zoosermom, thank you for your thoughtful posts. I didn’t agree with some of what you said, but I most certainly agree with this comment:</p>

<p>“We are on the last page of Animal Farm here; I can no longer tell the men from the pigs.”</p>

<p>In my opinion, the truest words yet on this thread are digmedia’s:</p>

<p>" … the entire political process has been ruined by the money issues and many Dems are just as guilty for our mess as Republicans"</p>

<p>I have been on the brink of changing my party registration many times. I recently contributed to a primary challenger to a Democratic senator, and I do not support Hillary Clinton for president (or senator, if anyone better comes along), although I do not understand the fear and loathing that prevails on the right (and I can’t fathom why anyone considers her a liberal). She’s a well-meaning woman who has been a mediocre senator and who lacks the capability for leadership. But I see no chance that she will be nominated. There are major changes underway in the Democratic party, and I see her wing losing out. If this doesn’t happen, count me in for a third party (although not a conservative one!)</p>

16

<p>digmedia, driver is referring to dailykos.com. I recommend it highly.</p>

17

<p>Despite your disdainful tone, FF, I will answer you anyway, since it isn’t hard to discuss 10-20, or all 750, if you prefer.</p>

<p>Bush challenges hundreds of laws
President cites powers of his office</p>

<p>By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | April 30, 2006
WASHINGTON – President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/?page=full[/url]”>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/?page=full&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

18

<p>Dig, I would say that refusing to cooperate during a national security emergency would be legitimate grounds for the government to stop using Qwest for classified national security work. Seems like a no-brainer.</p>

<p>DailyKos, aka the fever swamp, is the largest anti-Bush blog/message board, which is responsible for the constant recycling of anti-Bush media pieces.</p>

19

<p>“And I suppose you can also argue that AT&T, Bell South, and Verizon were the ones violating the law, not the administration. It won’t fly with me.”</p>

<p>This information scares the heck out of me. If we all know this, then so do the terrorists and they will adjust accordingly.</p>

20

<p>Thank you NYMom. I don’t ever expect anyone to agree with me about everything (or anything for that matter), but I’m always appreciative not to be spit on or have my parenting called into question. One of my daughters is a conservative who is planning to run for office someday (the other leans liberal). Her teacher said to her yesterday “Stop it now, you’re scaring me because we will never need another elected republican.” The woman was serious.</p>

<p>As to Hillary, I’m one who just despises her. I can’t stand anything about her and believe that underneath the stolid exterior beats the heart of a true believing liberal. That said, I think she is brilliant, hardworking, savvy and dedicated. If I didn’t dislike her poiltically so much, I still wouldn’t like to see her elected president because of her husband. I am so deathly sick of seeing him, hearing his voice and hearing about him. The man is a sexual predator who should be shunned and isolated from polite society. However, if HIllary is elected I will not leave the country, I will not commit suicide, I will not pout for 8 years and I will respect her as President.</p>