Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh yes, George Bush the great liberal. So please explain to me why 95 percent of those who call themselves Tea Partiers voted for him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Talking about "buying something hook-line-sinker" George Bush a conservative? And anti-Liberal? Good God, stop yourself man ... what foolishness is this?
George Bush, and everything he represented and did was extreme liberal. The big clue here is simply to look at what Obama is doing .... he's George Bush III (on steroids).
Bush presided over the largest expansion of the federal government in the history of the United States .... and there is NOTHING "Conservative" about that ... nor is it conservative to run massive deficits, and pursue agendas of endless foreign wars ... create a police state, or engage in domestic terrorism against tyour own people.
And, as far as your Canadian Freedom is concerned .... what a belly laugher ..... news flash ..... The Queen Mum OWNS YOU ... and your entire country, lock, stock and barrel.
George Bush, and everything he represented and did was extreme liberal. The big clue here is simply to look at what Obama is doing .... he's George Bush III (on steroids).
Bush presided over the largest expansion of the federal government in the history of the United States .... and there is NOTHING "Conservative" about that ... nor is it conservative to run massive deficits, and pursue agendas of endless foreign wars ... create a police state, or engage in domestic terrorism against tyour own people.
The fact that GWB presided over the largest expansion of the federal government in history doesn't prove he was a liberal. It just proves that conservatives are hypocrites.
When conservatives are in power, they have no problem with expanding government and running huge deficits and using the federal government to overrule state courts and don't mind using govt to overrule personal choice (e.g. abortion.) Republican Saint Reagan proved conservatives are hypocrites with his massive deficits. Nobody can seriously argue that Reagan was a liberal.
It also requires the ability to twist logic into a pretzel to conclude Bush was a liberal. This was a guy that wanted to privatize Social Security; defund Medicare and Medicaid; cut programs for the poor, etc.
Bush was/is no liberal -- but perhaps you are so many light years to the right of Bush that you can't tell a conservative from a liberal?
Bush was conservative in nature in regards to tax policies, but very liberal when it came down to spending.
So in other words, Bush was exactly like every Republican president or presidential hopeful (save Ron Paul and a handful of other way-of-the-reservation folks) we've had since Reagan? Which Republic hopeful do you think will not be a big spending, tax cutting, nation harming president?
Oh yes, George Bush the great liberal. So please explain to me why 95 percent of those who call themselves Tea Partiers voted for him?
Because, by and large, the American electorate on both sides get their political education through mainstream television news, and as a collective, aren't qualified to elect even their local dog catcher. That's why.
And this is probably why you have such a distorted view of the "Tea Party", since it was originally a collective carryover of Ron Paul supporters, after the republican party marginalized Paul just as much as the democrats did. Of course you probably also believe that the Tea party all dress up in white sheets and hoods and burn crosses at their gatherings too?
I've got good advice for you ... don't listen to what people say ... watch what they do. Bush certainly claimed to be a republican conservative ... actually a neocon ... or "New Conservative". There is a reason for the "New" in that title, which obviously admits that there is a difference compared to the "Old Conservative". This is Orwellian speak for claims that up is actually down.
The reality is, the Tea Party was quickly attacked from all sides as their visibility and populist views attracted more support. The mainstream party of one comprised of Republicrats and Demopublicans certainly viewed the Tea Party message as a threat to their supremacy (given their collective contempt for the US Constitution), so the repubs infiltrated, while the dems played the racist card.
It's pathetic how it is so easy to manipulate public opinion, and herd the masses back into their little pastures. All that is required are a handful of barking dogs on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. Does the trick, every time!
Talking about "buying something hook-line-sinker" George Bush a conservative? And anti-Liberal? Good God, stop yourself man ... what foolishness is this?
George Bush, and everything he represented and did was extreme liberal. The big clue here is simply to look at what Obama is doing .... he's George Bush III (on steroids).
Bush presided over the largest expansion of the federal government in the history of the United States .... and there is NOTHING "Conservative" about that ... nor is it conservative to run massive deficits, and pursue agendas of endless foreign wars ... create a police state, or engage in domestic terrorism against tyour own people.
And, as far as your Canadian Freedom is concerned .... what a belly laugher ..... news flash ..... The Queen Mum OWNS YOU ... and your entire country, lock, stock and barrel.
First of all I'm not talking about conservatives. We have a very conservative government in Canada and by and large they are doing a good job. I'm talking about that disfunctional, idiot ,self serving organization called the GOP.
The Queen is just the representitive head of state in our country. She owns nothing and she has nothing at all to do with public policy. The crown is a symbol and a very good one it is I must add. What the crown represents is the sovereignity of THE PEOPLE and that is why we have far greater freedoms than the USA. Any political leader is just that and nothing else. He will pass away and another will take his place. They will all fail in one way or another but it does not hurt the collective souls of the Canadian people. THE CROWN REPRESENTS PERMANENT VALUES that make up what joins all Canadians together into a strong united and patriotic nation.
You on the other hand have sleasy politicians as your head of state and when they screw up big time like they almost always do america and Americans go into shock and dispair. I've seen it too many times. Nixon and watergate. Clinton and his never ending soap opera. Obama and what the Obama haters make up and so on.
Ww don't have that kind of problem here in a parlimentary democracy. We expect politicians to screw up and when they don't do it too badly it's a bonus.
Its obvious the canadian is a liberal. He only has to rememeber when Canada had similar problems and in fasct had its rating drop. I just liten to one of the french representatives and fail to see that much has changed except economic circumstances really.
Because, by and large, the American electorate on both sides get their political education through mainstream television news, and as a collective, aren't qualified to elect even their local dog catcher. That's why.
And this is probably why you have such a distorted view of the "Tea Party", since it was originally a collective carryover of Ron Paul supporters, after the republican party marginalized Paul just as much as the democrats did. Of course you probably also believe that the Tea party all dress up in white sheets and hoods and burn crosses at their gatherings too?
I've got good advice for you ... don't listen to what people say ... watch what they do. Bush certainly claimed to be a republican conservative ... actually a neocon ... or "New Conservative". There is a reason for the "New" in that title, which obviously admits that there is a difference compared to the "Old Conservative". This is Orwellian speak for claims that up is actually down.
The reality is, the Tea Party was quickly attacked from all sides as their visibility and populist views attracted more support. The mainstream party of one comprised of Republicrats and Demopublicans certainly viewed the Tea Party message as a threat to their supremacy (given their collective contempt for the US Constitution), so the repubs infiltrated, while the dems played the racist card.
It's pathetic how it is so easy to manipulate public opinion, and herd the masses back into their little pastures. All that is required are a handful of barking dogs on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. Does the trick, every time!
Thank you.
For those who do not believe it compare domestic spending under the Bush v. Clinton administration.
Let me add the major accomplishments under the Clinton administration was welfare reform and NAFTA, relatively conservative accomplishments. The major "accomplishments" under Bush was a new prescription drug program for seniors and further federal interference in education.
Let me add that GW was the number one Keynesian of all time. He trumped Keynes by running huge deficits even in times of near full employment.
Last edited by whogo; 09-02-2011 at 11:49 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
