Bush comapres himself to the tyrant and racist Lincoln

Bush: I'll Stick to Principle, Like Abe

Monday April 23, 2007 10:01 PM


AP Photo WHGH112

By KEVIN FREKING

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush empathized with Abraham Lincoln on Monday, saying they both stood by their principles in the face of criticism during wartime.

The president took seniors and advocacy group leaders on a tour of the Oval Office after a meeting on Medicare's drug benefit. Though the war in Iraq was not openly discussed, its presence was obvious.

Bush told the group there is great pressure in Washington to change principles for the sake of political popularity, but he said he would not.

``It's a struggle for some. It's not for me,'' he said.

He showed the group a portrait of Abraham Lincoln. He said Lincoln was unpopular during the Civil War but maintained his belief that all men are created equal.

``Look what would have happened to history'' if Lincoln had abandoned that principle, Bush said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6580997,00.html

Bush gets more and more embarrassing everytime he opens his mouth.

I wish this was like 24 and Cheney would maneuver him out of office and Cheney could take over.

While Abe was wrong in what he did, he was a strong leader with his own beliefs. I, for one, am glad that he kept this country one. This country would have become a backwater hick town split assunder.

Bush has some good messages, but he can't deliver them for anything. His comments were directed at the Dhimmicrats who are not standing by any principles, but sway with the poll numbers.

I would rather see a leader who has principles, even if some of them are wrong, and who will stand firm with them. The alternative is a Kerry leader. Or a Clinton leader. That is intolerable.

If you are untrue to your core principles, then you are a nothing.

if the principles you refer to are the defense of your industry at any cost and by any means, then the reps aren't worth the respect you afford them

republicans have always been further to the right than democrats, and it's shown, both domestically and internationally. whenever a republican gov't gets into office, somehow the defense budget and the interests of big business become far more important than education, social services, infrastructure, etc - you leave those issues for the democrats

it also seems that whenever a republican gov't comes into office, the country suddenly becomes more conservative; censurship becomes more common, criticism becomes unpatriotic, and religion takes on a bigger role

these might all be good things for you, but these are not the values that make (or at least made) america an attractive country for people to immigrate to and to live in

Where in the Constitution does it say we have to provide education, welfare or social services? That is not the role of the government, not the Federal Government.

The Federal Government is to provide defense to the Nation.

Its because of the leftist democrats that we have the school system we have. It is ineffectual, it is moonbat bordering on socialistic.

What BS are you talking about censorship? Come on Popov, you are better than that, repeating DNC talking points that have no truth to them. What would you call Reid saying the war is lost? A pep talk? What would you call all the comments made by the left against EVERYTHING republican? What do you call undermining the troops while at war? Criticism is one thing, what the dhimmicrats are doing is far more insidious than that. What party is the one that is erroding the core values of the Country? What party is the one that believes that everything you do is fine regardless of how it destroys the family?

The Dhimmicrats are socialists. While that may make this country more appealing to you, as you have demonstrated that you have strong socialist leanings, it doesn't make it appealing to the citizens here. To whom does the government have the greater responsibility toward? Immigrants of leftist leanings or the people who pay their paychecks?

Sorry Popov, but that post was one that could have come from Howie Dean, not a thinking rational individual.

no friend, the dems are middle of the roaders with socialist leanings. that's what i am, i'm not a socialist, i support a moonbat economy but i also think that all of what i mentioned should be a priority, that a country's first duty is to the wealth and wellbeing of its citizens as a whole, and that spending shitloads on the conquest of foreign nations should not take center stage. obviously my vision of the situation is blurry at times because i have been living outside the country since 2000. nevertheless i stand by my assumptions - and when i talk about censorship i mean as a whole, not just political - but let that one go, im not one to judge because i don't watch enough american media to compare to censorship under the clinton admin. it just seems that under reps, god and guns play a far greater role in politics, and that's not something that's appealing to me. im no atheist, nor am i an anti-gun activist, but it just feels like there's too much emphasis on war and religion whenever a rep gov't is running the white house

I'm just glad Texas has a seccession clause in it's Constitution so we can bail out when y'all let HillaryObama get elected.

One more thing:

Lincoln was a racist, power mad tyrant.


---------------------------------

Popov wrote:no friend, the dems are middle of the roaders with socialist leanings.

That is your first mistake, friend. Dems are far from being middle of the road. That only exists in their rhetoric. Socialism in any form is going to lead to failure. That has been proven every time.

[quote=Popov}that's what i am, i'm not a socialist, i support a confused individual economy but i also think that all of what i mentioned should be a priority, that a country's first duty is to the wealth and wellbeing of its citizens as a whole, and that spending shitloads on the conquest of foreign nations should not take center stage.[/quote] Sorry, at Country is not there to ensure the wealth and well being of the individuals. That is YOUR obligation to yourself. The Country is to protect its citizens. Conquest of foreign nations would make America's job and wellbeing far more easy. Too bad we don't do that. Europe, Japan, Korea, would be better off with us in charge.[/quote]
[quote=Popov] obviously my vision of the situation is blurry at times because i have been living outside the country since 2000. nevertheless i stand by my assumptions - and when i talk about censorship i mean as a whole, not just political - but let that one go, im not one to judge because i don't watch enough american media to compare to censorship under the clinton admin. it just seems that under reps, god and guns play a far greater role in politics, and that's not something that's appealing to me. im no atheist, nor am i an anti-gun activist, but it just feels like there's too much emphasis on war and religion whenever a rep gov't is running the white house[/quote]Come on, that is pushing it. NO country has freer speech than America has. NONE. Quite honestly, why do you think that God plays a greater role in Republican politics than the Democrats? Could it be that the Dems oppose just about all the teachings of the major religions and hold up their LIBERALISM as their god? Guns are the means that we are guaranteed by the Constitution. It was one of the most important things that our founding fathers realized was missing in the original version and had to be corrected VERY early on. Why? Because it was use of guns that brought about freedom. Why do the Dems almost to a person believe that there needs to be limitations to gun ownership?

I just read some Dem, I forget which one because they don't believe in America, they want some socialist state instead, who was advocating that EVERY gun be taken from their owners, the first three months after the legislation passed would be given a free ride, after that it was fines and imprisonment. He thought that hunters could still have their guns to go hunting, but they all needed to go into some bank vault where they were only allowed to be withdrawn after lengthy paperwork.

This was to be enforced by entering homes and taking guns from people who were suspected of having them.

So, not only did this jerk want to strip away the Constitutional right of arms, the idiot also believed in illegal search and seizure. Another Constitutional right stepped on.

The Dems are moving far away from the center. I hear it and see it here every day. McCarthy would have no lack of true targets in today's democrat party.

no friend, the dems are middle of the roaders

The middle of the road leads to socialism.

Wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction.

Popov wrote:no friend, the dems are middle of the roaders with socialist leanings. that's what i am, i'm not a socialist, i support a confused individual economy but i also think that all of what i mentioned should be a priority, that a country's first duty is to the wealth and wellbeing of its citizens as a whole, and that spending shitloads on the conquest of foreign nations should not take center stage. obviously my vision of the situation is blurry at times because i have been living outside the country since 2000. nevertheless i stand by my assumptions - and when i talk about censorship i mean as a whole, not just political - but let that one go, im not one to judge because i don't watch enough american media to compare to censorship under the clinton admin. it just seems that under reps, god and guns play a far greater role in politics, and that's not something that's appealing to me. im no atheist, nor am i an anti-gun activist, but it just feels like there's too much emphasis on war and religion whenever a rep gov't is running the white house

popov, you're a socialist.

Let's not go so far as to assume that Bush is a conservative or even a Republican in anything other than party affiliation. Lets also look at the history of US wars in this matter. Vietnam.... Kennedy was a Democrat. Korea.... Truman, Democrat, WWII.... you think FDR was a Republican? Guess if you want to base that statement only on Afghanistan and Iraq you might be right but if you want to base it on fact you've got it backwards. (Forgot Bosnia... Clinton, Democrat I'm sure there are others).

The problem with US politics at this point in time is that both parties are owned by big business and the voter is nothing but a pawn in their way to total control.

I'll agree that a nation's duty is to a large part the wealth and well-being of it's citizens but I think where we'll part company is on just how this should be done. I believe that the government owes every citizen the opportunity to acquire wealth and be well, the opportunity to get an education, the opportunity to be healthy while the socialists want to mandate what they believe is best for me. Exactly how is the well-being of US citizens served by the welfare giveaway system that has produced generations of people who have never had a job? How has our children's education been served by a system that views it more important to see that every child gets a lousy education rather than children who want to learn get a good education. Actually our education system has turned into a political indoctrination system for the left and the "educators" hate the fact they have to test children in order to keep their jobs.

As for government censorship of the media, that's a laugh. Our media has run amok and it's 90% controlled by socialists. They're intensely anti Bush administration to the point where numerous incidents of manufactured stories exist. Our media will leak military and intelligence secrets to harm our efforts to keep our citizens safe and make the administration look bad at every turn.

Buzzy wrote:

The problem with US politics at this point in time is that both parties are owned by big business and the voter is nothing but a pawn in their way to total control.

And corporations do not have the vote, or citizenship, but do have POWER. Moreover, many of them are "multinational" or have pulled roots out of the USA to move to another country (Haliburton).
They have no allegiance to a nation or a people, but to their own selfish profit.