Some members of the RNC want to take an extraordinary action against President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress:
Republican Party officials say they will try next month to pass a resolution accusing President Bush and congressional Republican leaders of embracing “socialism,” underscoring deep dissension within the party at the end of Mr. Bush’s administration.
Those pushing the resolution, which will come before the Republican National Committee at its January meeting, say elected leaders need to be reminded of core principles. They said the RNC must take the dramatic step of wading into policy debates, which traditionally have been left to lawmakers.
“We can’t be a party of small government, free markets and low taxes while supporting bailouts and nationalizing industries, which lead to big government, socialism and high taxes at the expense of individual liberty and freedoms,” said Solomon Yue, an Oregon member and co-sponsor of a resolution that criticizes the U.S. government bailouts of the financial and auto industries. Republican National Committee Vice Chairman James Bopp Jr. wrote the resolution and asked the rest of the 168 voting members to sign it.
“The resolution also opposes President-elect Obama’s proposed public works program and supports conservative alternatives,” while encouraging the RNC “to engage in vigorous public policy debates consistent with our party platform,” said Mr. Bopp, a leading attorney for pro-life groups who has also challenged the campaign finance legislation that Mr. Bush signed.
It’s the political equivalent of the black spot from Treasure Island, a clear denouncement of a President by his own party. It would be a humiliating censure for President Bush, but I think it’s got to be done. If the GOP is to rebuild its brand, it’s got to find someway to extricate itself from the bailout position of Bush, Boehner, and McConnell. Of course, Bush still has some lieutenants and lackeys who are there because of his good graces and they may put up a good fight, but with Bush weakened as he is, I think this has got at least a 50-50 shot.
December 31st, 2008 at 2:08 am
This is incredibly stupid. All this will do is drive another wedge into the party and feed the media narrative about President Bush being worse then Hitler and creating a perception that the RNC is only doing this because we lost. The RNC should focus on the race for chairman, not backstabbing the President.
December 31st, 2008 at 6:27 am
Oh please. It’s got to be done? The man is out of here in three weeks. Everyone has some sort of problem with him now that his numbers are where they are. This is nothing but cowardice. It’s not going to elevate the Republicans and only further serves to validate the Dems that criticized him since Hanging Chad was all the talk in FL so very very long ago.
Here’s an idea. Let it go. The party needs to start fresh in order to win and everyone knows it. Let’s not tar and feather the guy who, for all his faults, at least had enough sense to push the Patriot Act and Counter_terror measures. Those actions were at least somewhat responsible for seven years sans 9/11 Part II. And anyone honest knows it.
And railing against the bailout wins the GOP cred with the base and no one else. In order to get popular support for the party above 40 or 45 percent, the GOP has to TEACH why we’ve been off track for a long time. You can’t do that with some stupid bitchy little resolution.
December 31st, 2008 at 7:44 am
Adam Graham, I am sorry that all of a sudden I have to agree with Jonathan and Adam instead of you, but frankly, you should be a little ashamed for trashing our great President. Yes, I disagree with the President on bail-outs, but he has brought democracy to women and men in the middle east, he has kept our families safe, he has appointed Conservative judges and he has lowered our taxes. Why are you turning on this great man?
December 31st, 2008 at 7:47 am
#4:
Because he’s destroying our country with more than $8.5 trillion in bailouts. I don’t how old you are. But my generation will bear the burben of Bush’s socialism. He’s liberated people overseas and will help put people in our country under the yoke of hyper-inflation and expensive government for genrations. Certainly, I don’t condemn his work overseas, but his work at home on the economy is so destructive, the GOP has to seperate itself from it.
December 31st, 2008 at 7:55 am
“I don’t how old you are.” Not that I like to discuss my age, but I am a proud Gen Xers for the record. I think it is a little extreme to say he is destroy this country. I do not agree with how he is handling the current economic situation, but it is harsh to blame him for the mess. He does not control our banking system and he does not control the auto industry.
December 31st, 2008 at 8:01 am
He’s bailing them out. If it is not unchecked, it’s going to destroy our free market economy. At the very least, we’re going to go through some absolutely miserable hyperinflation in a few years. Bush and the House GOP disregarded Republican principles and I think there needs to be some response.
December 31st, 2008 at 8:35 am
Yes there needs to be some response to prevent the posibilty of hyperinflation, but please try not to have this great man trashed.
December 31st, 2008 at 9:03 am
Republicans are becoming a bunch of backstabbing bastards.
December 31st, 2008 at 9:06 am
When the President was winning election after election for the GOP nobody was complaining, now that his number are low and he is leaving the White House everybody want to dump on him.
December 31st, 2008 at 9:13 am
Adam G,
It just sounds petty and insincere. In the 1990′s, the GOP was against the Clinton policy of giving away mortgages with little thought. Then all of a sudden, in comes Bush and his Ownership Society and all of a sudden the protestations stopped. The GOP House and Senate members, in large measure, just looked the other way. They gave up the fight because god forbid they opened their mouth and say that a black man named John Smith with no credit or bad credit eking out a $20k/year existence just might not qualify for a loan. No no. That would be racist.
These Republicans are just as guilty as Bush. They were complacent. They were too happy to shut up and not worry about teaching the dangers of giving away a free lunch with the electoral victories were racking up. Now, all they are doing is looking for a scapegoat.
Change the policy. Teach economic principle to the masses. Don’t wuss out and try to tag this on Bush when there is a hell of a lot more blame to go around.
December 31st, 2008 at 9:17 am
The world (or at least the year) must be coming to an end; I agree with Falz as well as Adam.
December 31st, 2008 at 9:59 am
#11
LOL
I still remember the campaign commercials a local man ran in his campaign for Congress against Democrat Jim Matheson.
They essentially said “I support President Bush” as the guy gets on his horse… (and the implication was that President Bush wanted another Republican in Congress, so President Bush supported John Swallow. I hated the commercials then and I still hate the commercials now (John Swallow lost both times he ran). Plenty of people, however, were riding President Bush’s coattails into office and he did help keep our country safe from terrorism.
Do I agree with everything he said and did? No, but that isn’t going to happen with any political leader. Bush is a fine man and a good President, and history will show that, eventually.
December 31st, 2008 at 10:15 am
This is like watching the roosters in the barnyard fighting over which gets the top honor of crowing from atop the manure pile…
December 31st, 2008 at 10:53 am
Anyone going to post on the South Carolina Unemployment Fund going broke?
It could directly affect a certain Governor Mark Sanford whose picture is on the left…
December 31st, 2008 at 10:58 am
I think what most people who oppose the bailouts are forgetting is the alternative.
Allowing credit to completely dry up, allowing some of the largest financial firms in the country to cease to exist, allowing the American automakers to go out of business would have done a lot more damage to the economy than the bailouts. You would be talking about soaring unemployment, more failures as the retailers were hurt, huge declines in tax revenue, and probably more than the money spent on the bailout going towards unemployment and welfare. Its very ease to oppose the bailouts on principle – not so easy to oppose them arguing facts.
There may be good reason to be concerned about inflation – but since the bailouts, the exact opposite has happened.
====
Some people don’t seem to understand this, but complete government non-involvement in the economy is a lot more likely to bring socialism to this country a lot more quickly than aid to a few troubled industries once in a while.
Socialism isn’t going to become the law of the land because the government wrote a check to keep the credit markets flowing, and it isn’t going to become the law of the land because the government stopped GM from going out of business.
The recent bailouts are not the first assistance the government has given to the private sector – and yet the free market is still alive and well.
December 31st, 2008 at 10:59 am
“It could directly affect a certain Governor Mark Sanford whose picture is on the left…”
Has Sanford done ANYTHING to indicate he plans to make a serious run in four years?
December 31st, 2008 at 11:26 am
MathewK: I agree that the opposite of inflation (deflation) could be at least as bad, but where do all these bail-outs end? Yes a few bail-outs are not going to kill Capitalism, but we must draw the limit somewhere. Mr. Frank, Mr. Dodds and the other clowns on the Senate banking committee should be in jail for giving us this credit crunch.
Ogrepete:
I too do not agree with every single thing that Mr. Bush has done, but I am with him on the major issues. I am glad that you are a defender of this great man and not a trasher like so many of our fellow countrymen. These people should be ashamed of themselves.
December 31st, 2008 at 11:30 am
#16
No idea, but I didn’t put his picture up on the site.
December 31st, 2008 at 11:33 am
Well, you have to take it on a case-by-case basis.
Obviously, the credit markets are essential to economic function – so that one was ok. The auto companies are also vital to the health of our manufacturing sector, and are without any domestic replacement. Also OK.
I really can’t think of any other industry that would be justified in getting a bailout.
December 31st, 2008 at 11:50 am
I happily voted for Bush in 2000, but angrily voted against him in 2004. He’s pissed on the very ideas of fiscal conservativism and personal liberty. He’s treated his constituency as if we were moronic manipulable simpletons. He’s destroyed the respect just about every other country has for us. He’s given me and my children an unconscionable debt load that will likely take decades to recover from.
He hasn’t done anything to solve the heathcare, social security, or infrastructure problems we face.
**BUT** this isn’t Bush’s fault alone. I find it ridiculous that any Republican in DC feels they have moral high ground to attack Bush this way. The vast majority of them have been complicit in this and I was extremely pleased to see the party get their asses handed to them in the election.
December 31st, 2008 at 11:52 am
MatthewK,
what about the airline industry? obviously “too important to fail”
the tech industry? ditto
the steel industry? please…
You only justify the auto industry because you have a personal interest there.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:00 pm
no, and you may have a point about the tech and steel industries, although the airlines are a different story – of course if we actually start to see a shortage in seats, you might have to act. But the domestic airline industry doesn’t face a takeover by foreign companies if, say, American or United fails…
The Autos, and perhaps some other industries, are in the situation where, if they go under, the US will likely permanently lose its share.
Thats the problem with letting GM go out of business – it would leave the US dependent on other countries, when we are already far too reliant on others for so much.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:01 pm
#15 & 19
Well said. This is not an “all or nothing” game.
You can actually choose what is worth the investment (as said in 15) and what is not.
The governement has always “interferred” with the “free market”. Contrary to popular opinion by some a total free market capitalistic society is as doomed to failure as total socialism, marxism, or any other “extreme”.
Think of the early 20th century “monopoly busting” such as Ma Bell the government undertook. That was interference.
The trick is doing so wisely and in moderation, and most importantly only in times of extreme circumstances.
This is not Anti-America, or anything else. Government “interference” is as old as our democracy and at times vitally necessary. Think Washigton and the Whiskey Rebellion. We were on the verge of bankruptcy just after the Revolution.
If the government were not there to act quickly and necessarily at times what is the point of having a government at all?
The trick is to fight the “Next New Deal” promised by the new admistration. We do so with our own ideas which do not include “let them fail; its their fault”.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:01 pm
“He hasn’t done anything to solve the heathcare, social security, or infrastructure problems we face.” With respect, I ask how is (was) Mr. Bush to fix it, more Socialism? With regards to Social Security, Mr. Bush tried to fix it , but he was filabustered.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Being dependent on Japanese cars are not the end of the world. They can produce a better car for less money and they employ American workers.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:06 pm
This embarrassing and stupid. Bush has rendered a lot of great service for this country that people like Adam and Hucksters are willing to throw under the bus at the first chance. Typical. Hucksters continue to alienate other (and necessary) factions of the GOP. People like Adam (and Huckabee), if they are allowed to, would make this one small party.
Disagree with the bailouts–most of us do. So say so. But this resolution during Bush’s last few weeks by Hucksters (and it certainly looks like that is who is primarily behind it when you look at those supporting it and who they support) is disgusting.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Is it really “Hucksters” that are the main push behind this resolution?
December 31st, 2008 at 12:13 pm
#25
Until China becomes a bigger, cheaper market for sales and employment. The fact is there is no “ties” for Jananese companies to remain in the US long term. Their profits all leave the US as well. So we turn to manufacturing dependence solely with foreign companies and when they leave we become a third wold country. Not too much bankers, accountants, realtors, developers can do when their is no national wealth left.
Bottom line is the US government is suppose to protect US interests. That is both individual liberties and business.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Top phrase that should be outlawed for 2009: “throw under the bus”
December 31st, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Does anyone believe this bailout is likely to ever yield an independent and successful US automaker? Or is it just going to postpone the inevitable?
December 31st, 2008 at 12:26 pm
What this is really about is a group of Republicans trying to gain the upper ground as to who is more conservative for 2012. The fact is that few people in the USA had enough information to know whether or not the 700 billion was a necessary thing to keep us from having a complete financial meltdown. Most of those who knew the most and had the financial knowledge and credentials have said that it was necessary. When people like Huckabee and his group try to act as if they somehow magically gained enough knowledge as to whether or not the meltdown was actually going to occur defies credibility on their part. They certainly do not have the knowledge to make a judgement on such things. They are entitled to their opinion, but I would put my credentials against theirs on this subject, and I’ll admit I don’t have the foggiest idea whether or not it was mandatory to avoid MAJOR catastrophic problems for us.
The automobile industry was a completely different animal. They had an alternate path that would not have involved the government beyond what all other bankruptcies have ever required. Romney and others that indicated the first rescue plan was necessary did not back the auto one because they had alternate avenues to take.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Bags, with respect, “Hucksters” are not the only ones behind this non-sense. Many camps at some level are involved and they all should be ashamed.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:30 pm
#30 – I love American company cars, so I sure as heck hope something saves them. The depth of the recession we have entered depends completely on the American consumer. Everybody is spreading gloom and doom, and no leader is yelling from the top of the buildings that a deep recession can be avoided if people will just quit hoarding their money, and those of us with jobs need to act normal, instead of out of fear. This thing doesn’t have to be deep, but it could be a catastrophic problem if the consumer chooses to make it so, expecting everyone else to spend while they hoard.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Personally I think that the only hope the party has is to denounce the atrocious violations of its own platform. With so many hands dirty, however…
December 31st, 2008 at 12:32 pm
With respect Illinoisguy, I do not care how much knowledge Mr. Romney or anybody else might have. They are not going to save Detroit until those clowns gets their act together and stop their shenanigans. Many of us are getting tired of this.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Illinoisguy, bankruptcy appears to the most likely path to stopping the hemorraging in the auto industry. Not a temporary bandaid at the expense of us tax payers.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:44 pm
#30
I think they will, but not in the current form. They will constrict and 2 companies will emerge.
#35
To which shenenigans do you refer?
Too many are quick to react with nothing more than rehashed lines from a radio host that are not substanitive.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:50 pm
George:
I simply refer to among other things, the auto workers (for the big three) being overpaid for producing a so-so product. Further, these companies do not appear to be well managed. In short, many of the other 49 states do not want to bail out Michigan.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Trying to decide if this is a better idea than having a GOP Governor sell a senate seat.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
I agree that bankruptcy was the right path. That’s also what Romney had emphatically said. But the banking thing was an entirely different matter.
December 31st, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Ohio,
That is a statement with 2 misplaced facts
1. Over $15 of each hourly wage dollars quoted for Big 3 is paying legacy costs. Their own Social Security system. The B3 workers make in the area of $2 -$5 more in hour in salary. Which is on tap to be renegotiated.
2. B3 products have lower comsumer complaint, and recalls than the foreign producers.
Many in the other 49 states have had a bit of wool pulled over their eyes in the “it doesn;t affect us” game. This has been gone over too many times but the fact is B3 supplies, dealers, etc touch EVERY state in the union in a big way.
In truth; many in the other 49 states would like to bust the unions. As someone who has fought the U’s in every major campaign in adult life I can apprectiate that, but you don’t “throw out the baby with the bathwater”
December 31st, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Its the banking thing that I’m talking about few people having neither the information nor the knowledge bas to know what was necessary to avoid a financial collapse. The auto bailout obviously had other paths, and Romney openly and loudly stated that bankruptcy was the path to take for them
December 31st, 2008 at 1:03 pm
#39
Corruption is a stain that cannot be washed away; see Abramoff & Stevens.
Although, it could just be a GOP thing too; as Whitewater & Jefferson don’t ring the same tone.
In the end I would rather be chided for trying to do the right thing (Bush) and being judged a failure (still TBD by history) than knowingly doing the wrong.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:04 pm
george
I’ve seen varying statistics for the costs Detroit faces when producing cars. The fact is that it doesn’t matter why it costs them more. They simply cannot be expected to do as well until they unburden themselves of this excess, whether it be “legacy” costs, inflated wages, whatever.
Also, compare Detroit’s products to Toyota’s and Honda’s (i.e. don’t factor in Korean companies) and then give me a statement on consumer complaints and recalls.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Look, I realize that indirectly, the other 49 of us are depended on Michigan to a degree, but we will survive economically nevertheless. The statistics that I have seen shows that they make $5 to $10 more, not just $2 to $5.
Yes, the other 49 of us supply unfinished material goods to Michigan if you will, be we can alway supply to each other if Michigan does not want to play along. I do not wish to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but the baby’s bathwater needs to be cleaned up.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:13 pm
#44 – I hope you’re not going by Consumer Reports. It has a very high anti-American car company bias. Everyone in my family who drives American cars has fantastic luck with them. I get over 250K from all of them, and they are not all cadillacs. My son in law owns a Mercury Sable, and has over 250K on it, and its never had the valve cover gaskets off of it either. Everybody I know that drives American cars love them. Somehow, someway, there has crept in to the younger generation the concept that the foreign cars are better quality. I just don’t buy it. I’ve had two cadillac Sedan Devilles in a row that get 26-29 mph highway, and I can’t find anyone claiming a like model foreign car getting that good of gas mileage.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:23 pm
I own (and drive) an American vehicle too and I have all my driving life. Look, all things being equal, I like to buy American, but my consumser loyalty is not bottomless. It is more than just bad luck that the Big 3 is experiencing such trouble. They need to compete. I do not mind paying a nickel more in the grocery store for a better product, but I do not enjoy paying double. The union can wrap themselves in the flag and that is good for a while, but I am not going to fall for this forever. The game is about to end.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:24 pm
First off; I agree with both #44 the need to shed costs and #45 the need to clean the water.
I think both are areas which the companies have been fighting the UAW very hard with large concessions to show in both 05 and 07 contracts. It took 100 years to build up those costs and they cannot be jetisoned overnight.
The fact that for the past 3+ months you needed a 700+ credit score to get financed even after the banks were suppose to free up credit constricts all automakers. See Honda and Toyota showing 30+% declines in sales and the 2008 as the firt time both are in the Red as evidence.
This being structured a loan is why I support it; the money will be paid back even if as a creditor in bankruptcy.
Indeed I agree there have bad business decisions made and further concessions and cost cutting required.
The funny thing about statistics is that they can be manipulated to read anything you want to make them read. I will concede that I am sure the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
I do however beleive the B3 are the last and only significant manufacturing we have left and I am certian we cannot survive as a service based economy. A chance had to be taken to help them get through this recession and get their feet under them as the carpet was pulled out too fast to change with the terrain.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:39 pm
“Being dependent on Japanese cars are not the end of the world. They can produce a better car for less money and they employ American workers.”
Not the end of the world, no, but it could be very bad news for American economic and military supremacy. Economic because it would cause the trade deficit to soar, would do serious damage to our manufacturing sector, etc.
Militarily, should the need ever arise, it would leave us dependent on foreign countries and companies for our military hardware.
As for hiring American workers – sure, they do – hire some. But Most of the cars are still produced in other places, the majority of their white collar positions are not in the US, and corporate profits do not remain in the US as they do with GM and Ford.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:43 pm
True, most of the profits remain in this country, but speaking about American workers building the cars. Many American cars are actually made in Canada or Mexico. Yes they are our neighbors, but it is not even entirely true that all American cars are even made here.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Any vehicle assembled outside of the US is sold outside the US. They drive cars in Mexico and Canada.
Yes, in fact they also have plants in China (required to sell there) as well. Which I think highlights the point; they can pull out of China in a moments notice ceasing all operations without much of a thought if the political (business) atmosphere changes.
December 31st, 2008 at 2:07 pm
If they want to give anyone a black spot it should be Colin Powell for his traitorous behavior towards the RNC. In fact I feel they should issue black spots to all RINOs!
December 31st, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Yes, it is true that they drive cars in Canada and Mexico, in fact they probably drive more cars in relation to their GDP. However, it is my understanding that at least some cars (or at least some car parts) that are produced in Canada are purchased here in America. I have nothing against cars coming from Canada, I vacation there sometimes. However, it appears that a Japanese car is slightly more like to actually be made in America. Perhaps I am wrong.
On another note, I really think it is a myth that poor cars sales kill the transportation industry per se. Yes I am guilty of not buying an American car (or any other vehicle) in 2008. However, I do go regularly to American own repair companies to get my vehicles repaired. I just had some repair work done before Christmas. I also will get my other vehicle greased and oiled by an American owned company this weekend. The only reason I did not get it repaired earlier is because I was hit by a drunk (who first appeared in court yesterday,) but that is another story.
As important as the auto industry is, I for one support a lot of other American industries. Should they be bailed out too? Not all of my Christmas presents were made in China, Canada, Denmark or some other country.
December 31st, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Well said Tom in SoCal.
December 31st, 2008 at 2:38 pm
“True, most of the profits remain in this country, but speaking about American workers building the cars. Many American cars are actually made in Canada or Mexico. Yes they are our neighbors, but it is not even entirely true that all American cars are even made here.”
I know that, but what percentage of cars does GM produce in the US? Now compare that to Toyota.
December 31st, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Ohio, we can go back and forth for all of 2009.
The main point is a Japanese owned company is not an American owned company.
After 9/11 it was GM not Honda or Toyota that began “get America Rolling” to spark the economy.
During WWII it was the Big 3 who made, tanks, planes, engines, munitions, etc to combat the Honda & Toyota driven war machines from Japan and VW & Mercedes driven war machines of Germany.
Now I am not an isolationist but my guess is Kia plants would not help us if we went to war with N Korea.
As far as this claim of “Shouldn’t they all be bailed out”; does that mean you also support everyone’s right to absolute equality no matter what?
Name me another American industry that plays as vital a role in the national economy that has not been assisted in 2008?
December 31st, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Let’s see, the activists think that Bush is a socialist, the Senate GOP is socialist, and the House GOP leadership is at best too liberal. The “negro” joke is actually a plus for Chip and Katon Dawson’s all-white country club membership shouldn’t disqualify him.
It’s going to be a long time in the wilderness folks.
December 31st, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Well, I’ve never considered myself much of an “activist” myself. But if it isn’t socialism, what DO you call it when the President’s solution to the financial bailout is for the federal government to take an ownership interest in financial institutions and his solution to averting GM’s bankruptcy is for the federal government to take an ownership interest in GM?
If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…
December 31st, 2008 at 4:16 pm
The GOP needs to get on the record against bailouts -NO MORE BAILOUTS. Let the U.S. auto companies fail, but at the same time let the auto workers know that we are on their side – not on the union’s side and that the long term benefits of letting the auto companies collapse will out weigh any short term discomfort such an event might entail. We need to educate the American public about embracing the global economy and free trade and not to hold onto archaic money losers in the name of “nationalism” or nostalgia. We need to move to a global consumerist economy and away from bailouts and government subsidies propping up bankrupt manufacturing.
December 31st, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Wow. This is an insane proposal. Guess what — dumping on Bush after voting in lockstep with him for eight years of radical government expansion is not going to repair the Republican brand and make it a small-government political party. The Republican caucus in Congress could start the serious work by sacking the leadership next month. Anyone want to lay odds on that?
December 31st, 2008 at 5:58 pm
This is great! Finally the Republican Party might actually get a backbone and some principles.
President Bush has acted as a big government liberal since 2000. It is about time the party wakes up and calls him out for all his Socialism. Republican congress and Bush has been Socialists for many years with their growth of government, speding, and programs.
The Party is starting realize what a disaster Bush has been and that he will go down in history as one of the worst presidents ever.
Let the conservative revolution begin.
January 2nd, 2009 at 9:53 pm
While we’re at it, let’s condemn the New Deal and Social Security and medicare, which are also socialistic by the rigid definitions that are being employed.