We are in a new era of reverse executives: Bush/Cheney vs. Obama/ Biden. On May 16, 1:38�am, SgtUSMC <[email protected]> wrote: > I refer to anyone who follows the PNAC directives a neo-con. I know it > isn't exactly correct. > > I'm a fiscal conservative and that was one of the things I disliked > about Bush. And one of the things I have to bite my tongue about when > discussing the current regime. > > No, I don't think Bush ever made the comment about the constitution > even though I might throw it out there at times. ;) > > Securing the borders is another of the big issues with me. Neither > party is going to do it. > > The reason I started posting on political boards, my first board was > the Iraq board on ABC, was that I saw us being led into a war in Iraq > for no reason. I tried to post all I could on the facts, what I > thought were the facts, about Iraq and WMD. Well, pat yourself on the > back, boy. I was right. The Iraq War has gotten us into a lot of > issues and we had no reason to invade Iraq. I just feel we hurt our > country tremendously in the loss of life and economic problems by > invading Iraq. I think we'll be paying for that little adventure for a > long time. > > On May 15, 10:32�pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hey Sarge, > > > I understand what you mean when you call Bush a, "Neo-Conservative", but > > that tag is really incorrect. �A "Neo-Con" is a former Democrat, Bill > > Krystol, Wolfowitz, and a hand full of others are truly Neo-Cons.... > > > I was disillusioned with Bush, and publicly said so....I was his harshest > > critic, but not for what the far left extremists were critical of him for. > > Those indiviudals still today, (and there is one member that I was just > > engaging a few moments ago in Euwetopia, who) "Hate Bush, But Don't Know > > Why!!" > > > I too have a laundry list of things that Bush and the Bush Administration > > did, that was not at all conservative, and still today baffles me. � His > > fiscal economic policies made Ronald Reagan turn over in his grave, his lack > > of respect for the Constitution, (and I don't believe that Bush ever said, > > "The Constitution is just a God Damned Piece of Paper"!) �his failure to > > secure our borders, while at the same time asking Americans to give up their > > liberty are just a hand full of issues that I think Bush mismanaged. > > > Knowing the facts, as they are today, and thinking about what we believed at > > the time of the Iraq Invasion, coupled with the attack on September 11th, > > 2001, I don't fault Bush for invading Iraq. �I think it was a mistake now, > > but I didn't at the time. � I do blame Bush for the way the war was > > managed. �For the first two or three years, I don't think there was a > > concensus or an organized plan on getting out of Iraq. > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:37 PM, SgtUSMC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > If Bush was any kind of conservative it was a neo-conservative. I > > > don't think anybody wants to claim those fools. Dick Cheney, BTW, was/ > > > is a member of PNAC. There's no doubt that he is a traitor. > > > > I hope I never called Bush a conservative. He and Cheney hurt the > > > Republican party almost as much as these all talk and no walk people > > > like Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved, and the rest of the people who run > > > their mouths on the radio just to hear themselves talk. Get rid of > > > those people and maybe the party can attract real conservatives and > > > real people who can think for themselves rather than regurgitate what > > > they hear all day. > > > > I stated my opinion on TARP several times ... that I was against it. > > > And now we can bail out the banks but we can't bail out the man that > > > builds cars for a living. It just shows how fucked up this country is. > > > We need jobs and our oligarchy rulers don't give a shit whether people > > > have jobs or not. > > > > On May 15, 8:00 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Bush was not a conservative. �Many conservatives feel betrayed by not > > > only > > > > this, but his failure to secure the borders, and his last months in > > > office, > > > > when he started the TARP....Hell I have a laundry list too!!! > > > > > The Patriot Act is literally the remnants of the "Prison Litigation > > > Reform > > > > Act of 1996" which was gutted, and then repackaged after 9/11. �There > > > > are > > > a > > > > number of provisions of the Patriot Act that I am not opposed to, > > > > (especially after 9/11) but the restrictions on Americans' liberties, > > > when > > > > our own President would not secure our borders, is a classic example of > > > how > > > > President Bush was not a conservative!! > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 7:53 PM, SgtUSMC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This was one of a laundry list of items I gave which the Dems should > > > > > do when they got control of congress in 2006. However, they only > > > > > barely had control and the Republicans were fighting tooth and nail so > > > > > I can't place much blame on them. I hope they will correct these > > > > > issues now that they have the power to do so. Failure to repeal or > > > > > alter the unPatriot Act will fall squarely on the shoulders of the > > > > > Dems. I want to see them FIX these injustices including warrantless > > > > > searches, illegal wire-tapping, and torture. This country has stood > > > > > too long to see its values fail now. > > > > > > I just can't fight off the urge to remind you it was the idiot Bushies > > > > > who favored taking our liberty away. > > > > > > On May 15, 7:40 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Sarge, > > > > > > > Just to correct the "You" part of your missive: �Most conservatives > > > were > > > > > > outraged with certain portions of the Patriot Act, as well as the > > > > > > "Responsible Electronic Surveillance Act" of 2007. �Most > > > conservatives > > > > > were > > > > > > unhappy that President Bush endorsed this Bill, without specific > > > language > > > > > > that protected American citizens, but our outrage should be at the > > > > > Congress > > > > > > who actually passed this heinous legislation. �There was language > > > that > > > > > was > > > > > > omitted that would have protected American citizens, and been > > > congruous > > > > > to > > > > > > the 4th and 5th Amendment to the Constitution, which was > > > > > > specifically > > > > > left > > > > > > out of both pieces of legislation. �The result is, that the Justice > > > > > > Department can run roughshod over any American, if they so choose. > > > > > > > I haven't seen the Obama Administration, (who, Obama, Emanuel and > > > Clinton > > > > > > voted for this legislation!!) �come to advocate the reversal of this > > > > > > law..... > > > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 5:49 PM, SgtUSMC <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > We were telling you cons for years this was going to happen. You > > > let > > > > > > > them get away with wire-tapping just the foreign half (LOL, they > > > never > > > > > > > heard the US half!!) of a conversation and next thing you know > > > they're > > > > > > > sitting in your living room with cameras. But you people said it > > > was > > > > > > > ok if they listen to your phone conversations. So don't complain > > > about > > > > > > > it, this is exactly what you wanted the government to do.- Hide > > > quoted > > > > > text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
