http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070922/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush
I hope we get another President, in '08, who will do the same thing.
2007-09-22 05:47:33 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I agree. Democrats = Socialists. Isn't it sad how the Democrat Party has changed since Kennedy?
2007-09-22 05:53:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 6⤋
How True ! Liberals always use the "children" catch word when defending health care and other liberal socialist programs they support ! If you Liberal Socialist are for the "children" ; then do you feel the pain of the 30,000,000+ "children" that have been aborted because of your "liberal care & concern" for the "liberal health care" by your liberal supporting of the unethical , immoral laws that allow this ? We`re tired of hearing your Liberal Socialist definition of your care for children . All you Liberal Socialist have to do to make yourselves feel good about childrens health care without putting your burden of guilt on the rest of us ; is each of you adopt 2 children and show them the love and care only a Liberal Socialist can give ? Look at it like your boy Ted Kennedy would , "hey ; it`s 2 more votes" !! Feel free to adopt some ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTs too ! It is you Liberal Socialist that want them to have all the things reserved for American citizens without earning them , so adopt one or two , and you can pay for your dream yourself , and not use our money to support your agenda : which is exactly what Social Liberalism is ; Stating a heart felt desire to solve someone else`s problem`s, with someone else`s money other than your own !!!
2007-09-22 23:50:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Im a little worried here... the libs got something else going on here. They push a bill they know will get vetoed? These people are like drug runners. They let you (set up) have one, all the while they run 3 or 4 by you. You dont get something for nothing!
2007-09-22 13:22:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
No doubt I love it. Who wouldn't who is a reasonable thinker? I hope our next President is reasonable, too, and does what the American people want, too, unless the American people want to sacrifice their country for illegal alien freedoms, rather than their own people. A Democrat will sacrifice us, to our death. We must not let that happen. Freedom lives, still, and we as the people must never let that die!
2007-09-22 14:24:51 · answer #4 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I gather Bush is right again and the glib libs in congress are still wasting time and money by propagating a political statement out of the inability to create a law without rewriting the constitution.
Voted into office in 2006 and dumbfounded ever since.
2007-09-22 12:58:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Bush stopping the socialists? Isn't that a little bit like Hitler stopping the Nazis? Or Stalin stopping the communists? Bill Gates stopping the capitalists?
Bush has implemented more socialist programs than any president in recent history. So, any short-sighted argument in his favor for "stopping a socialist agenda" is nothing more than a partisan PR campaign. No, a president who is similar to Bush will be a disaster for the conservatives, the Republicans, and the nation. We need something FAR better than Bush.
2007-09-22 12:53:46 · answer #6 · answered by skip742 6 · 4⤊ 6⤋
Bush is doing a great job of propping up that deadwood freeloading military people with socialism. So Bush didn't stop those socialists. But they vote, children don't.
2007-09-22 12:54:36 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
By then there should be even more children eligible as business cuts back on providing group health care insurance.
This was a bipartisan bill passed in '97 by a Republican congress.
I sincerely hope that your wish for another President who would leave kids without healthcare comes true only if one of them is your daughter. I'm tired of people like you mistaking socialism for compassion, but if that's what it takes, so be it.
You'd be surprised how few infants are into rugged individualism.
2007-09-22 12:55:29 · answer #8 · answered by justa 7 · 2⤊ 8⤋
Love it!!! Why is it the Dems always imply their programs are......."for the children"? When did "the children" become so important to the Libs? After all, until they can walk,talk and donate to their campaigns, aren't they all just a clump of cells?
2007-09-22 12:59:29 · answer #9 · answered by Cherie 6 · 7⤊ 4⤋
Don't you think it is so cool how us republicans can gather around and see the witch hunting. I for one want to see those darn socialists in front of God trying to explain why they cared so much about the poor and downtrodden. Ha...he'll show them.
2007-09-22 12:54:46 · answer #10 · answered by suigeneris-impetus 6 · 2⤊ 5⤋