English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

1. Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. Another big government program.

2. No Child Left Behind. Expanded federal intervention into education, a state and local government issue.

3. Dubai Port Deal. Turn over a key National Security issue to the Arabs?!?

4. Nomination of Harriet Myers to Supreme Court. What qualifications other than she was your personal lawyer and friend?

5. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. See comment #4.

6. Mike Brown at FEMA and the Katrina response. another unqualified crony.

7. Immigration Reform. Let's partner with Teddy Kennedy and accuse conservatives who oppose this bill of racism.

8. The IRAQ War. Didn't he and Donald Rumsfield botch the whole prosecution of the war by not sending in enough troops to begin with?


Fellow Conservatives, a question. Hasn't George Bush been a huge disappointment? Aren't you sick and tired of him?

2007-09-02 03:02:40 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

9 answers

You are not alone. I have been disgusted with his irresponsibility, unlimited spending, massive government, anti-America policies from almost the beginning. Bush is NOT a conservative. He is a socialist who hides behind the flag and the Cross. Some of us do understand this.

2007-09-02 04:33:18 · answer #1 · answered by Hoosier Daddy 5 · 1 0

I think he bit off more than he could chew. I supported the man. Just wish he would have listened. You know of all the dinners and get togethers i was invited to by him and Laura, i never attended one. Why? Because it was never about that. He ended up listening to the wrong advice. As for the number of troops used at the beginning of the conflict. Mr. Rumsfeld was absolutely correct on limiting the number of troops used. Why? We were in fact only there to find WMD's and get Saddam. thus limiting(if any) troop casualties. That part i FULLY supported him on. Corporate greed took over after that. That of which i wanted to be no part of due to the cost of life it would cause. And it did. Self discipline is not as easy as it sounds for most. Rumsfeld got the sh1t end of the stick. He did exactly what needed to be done at the beginning. Don't ridicule the man for that. He did that part right.


And the illusion of a balanced budget. You'll never achieve that as long as they can print worthless fiat money out of thin air. There was only one time in US history when the country had ever been in the black so to speak. Andrew Jackson was president. The rest of what we have been led to believe is just mere bullshit. The only time a fiat currency should ever be used is as a means of last resort. if we were to return to a gold and silver backed currency here in the US, watch how fast world conflicts would cool off. That and it would help most certainly in addressing alternative(even possibly independent) energy use. Thus also stopping socialism dead in its tracks. They wouldn't be able to bullshit the ppl like they have been doing. This is another reason why i think the House of Reps is so vitally important. Even in fact more so than the President. that's why i was hoping the ppl wouldn't have voted this last election th way they did by putting the democrats in control. The people just basically gave them the fuel they needed to carry on. Though the peoples intentions were good, they were in fact misled. Now we are just one small step from full blown socialism.

Illegal immigration was the final straw that broke the camel's back for me. last year when they passed that construction bill for the border fence but never funded it right before the elections was it. Many had been fighting immigration reform 3 years previous to the events that unfolded before the 06 elections. I knew for certain if the dems got elected, that it would be shoved down our throats constatntly until the american ppl caved and gave in top wanting amnesty for the illegals. I knew it. Oh yes and by the way, the AFL-CIO was one of the biggest three supporters of it. Why? Because they needed to boost their dwindling membership numbers as well as decrease operating costs(yes that means wages) to remain alive in the workforce. So they had in fact created themselves a win win situation. Iraq was a major playing card for their side, so they focused everyones attention on that while all the while the other hand was being unnoticed as to its mischievous deeds. This also includes NAFTA, the NAU, the Nascocorridor, and the SPP. Come on guys how can any group seriously call themselves proamerican when most have a title beginning with International Brotherhood of this or that? Seriously. They're part of the socialist order. And that order needs to be dissolved, before we all end up slaves and reside in the hull of what used to be a once great American nation. Wake up.

2007-09-02 03:17:17 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Genuine conservatives are sick of Bush--just as you are. My own mother--a lifelong Republican--is supporting Hillary, simply because she doesnt want to see aanother one of the so-called "neoconservatives" get into office.

The problem is that the Repbublican party was, to all intents and purposes, hijacked by the extreme right and simply doesn't function to represent true conservatives. If the many decent and thoughtful Americans who happen to have conservative views want to fix this--and you should--you are going to have to push these extremists out and take your party back.

I hope you do--I'm a liberal, but I recognize that we as a nation need BOTH concerned people of conservative and liberal views--neither of us has a monopoly on good ideas and we are stronger toghether, arguing out and finding solutions--than we can ever be seperately.

But for America to get back to that, Bush and his right-wing ilk have got to go.

2007-09-02 03:21:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Welcome to the club!

I have written a 2-page paper in MS Word format with a strategy that gets our guys out of combat (but not out of Iraq) as soon as physically possible. The troops would remain near its borders where they could be supplied or could exit with relative safety.

The gist of the argument is:

(1) Iraq must fail and be replaced by Sunnistan, Shiastan, and Kurdistan for structural reasons: the Shi'ites won't give any oil to the Sunnis and the Sunnis won't pay taxes to a Shi'ite government.

(2) The Shi'ites are conning us: they could defeat the Sunnis, but prefer to feign weakness while they collect weapons and training. They will drag the war out as long as possible.

(3) The differing sects will settle their differences without interference from us or any other foreign power. The Shi’ites will win and then fight with each other.

(4) We must concentrate on Afganistan as soon as possible.

(4) The House must stop funding the war, which I show will not harm the troops. This requires a flood of letters, which my solution organizes.

I'm running out of space, but you have the essentials. If you want the paper, I will need your email address. I respect your reluctance to share it; in my position, an 84 year old WWII veteran, I don't care. I just want to save our guys, who are clueless in hell.

2007-09-02 03:18:52 · answer #4 · answered by marvinsussman@sbcglobal.net 6 · 2 1

I just read that 70% of our current national debt was created under Reagan, Bush, and Bush, and that only 2 or 3 of their budgets were actually balanced.

Conservatives most certainly should be disappointed!!

2007-09-02 03:24:03 · answer #5 · answered by ash 7 · 1 0

I can certainly agree with many of the point you make here. I still think that he has done fairly well with the many different circumstances he has been delt. God! Just think if Al Gore was president during the brief recession and 9-11!

Or better yet what about John Kerry with running of the Iraq war and the current disgrace of immigration policy?

All things considered, Bush has bee better than adequate, but still leaves a lot of room for improvement.

2007-09-02 03:19:02 · answer #6 · answered by Michael H 5 · 1 3

It's hard to be a TRUE Conservative and be a Bush supporter. Bush is as liberal as they come and yes, as a conservative, I'm very disappointed.

2007-09-02 03:14:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

apparently 28-30% of this country still supports Bush, and i'm positive they are all Conservatives.

2007-09-02 03:12:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

I agree, he has been disappointing.

2007-09-02 03:11:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers